Scott, --- "Weaver, Scott" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Gerry wrote: > > I think the bigger issue is whether view actions should be going > back > > to the server. I think going back to the server for every view > action > > leads to a great number of problems. Slow response, non-intuitive > > behavior, unintended side-effects such as when the user is on a > form > > and then does something like minimizes another portlet. This > causes a > > new request to be made to the server and the entire page is > reloaded > > which can result in some very strange things happening to their > form > > interaction. > > But then you loose the ability to process these types of actions at > the server level. Many of my portlets change their entire > content/layout when maximized. Wow! Well, I certainly don't think that most users would expect content to be changed just because they maximized! As far as layout, that should be controlled by the browser, so if you set things like width to 100% then the element would expand to the maximized size. Maximized layout shouldn't have anything to do with the server. > > As for forms, you should be able to code your portlets to intercept > form data on minimize/maximize/close. This is a lot of unnecessary work. Using client-side DOM/DHTML lets the pages behave normally and eliminates all of this extra work. > > > I don't think that at this point there > > should be any concern with not supporting browsers that are not > capable > > of html 4.0. > > Many handheld devices that accept HTML, like my T-Mobile Sidekick, > cannot handle DHTML. So this is a very real concern. In a perfect > world, we could rely on all users having compliant browsers and > upgrading in a timely fashion, however, this is just not the case. > > *===================================* > * Scott T Weaver * > * Jakarta Jetspeed Portal Project * > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * > *===================================* > Yes, handheld devices accept HTML and their browsers are detectable. Behavior can be adjusted accordingly. Additionally most small screen users with devices that handle HTML are going to avoid portal sites like the plague (at least for HTML). I've tried navigating regular HTML. Forget it! And I think it is now reasonable to drop support for absolutely *ancient* browsers. If we continue to try to keep everything tied to supporting these relics we will never make any progress. The later 4.x series browsers and above or even preferably 5.x series (1998 and newer) are all that should be necessary to support at this stage. Anything prior to this did not support open standards and is not worth dealing with. People who just plain refuse to upgrade from these *ancient* browsers need their Internet license revoked. :-) Gerry Reno > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Gerry Reno [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:14 PM > > To: Jetspeed Users List > > Subject: RE: IFramePortlet maximize > > > > Stuart, > > Thanks, I'll take a look at it. It may help in the short term. > > > > I think the bigger issue is whether view actions should be going > back > > to the server. I think going back to the server for every view > action > > leads to a great number of problems. Slow response, non-intuitive > > behavior, unintended side-effects such as when the user is on a > form > > and then does something like minimizes another portlet. This > causes a > > new request to be made to the server and the entire page is > reloaded > > which can result in some very strange things happening to their > form > > interaction. > > > > My comment in the bug: > > http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=21656 > > Additional Comments From Gerry Reno 2003-07-16 18:18 > > > > Although there are a few things that have to be accounted for in > doing > > client-side DOM/DHTML manipulation, I greatly prefer this type of > > approach. It is much more responsive for the user and the pages > behave > > intuitively as the user expects. The box-model problem of IE is > easily > > detectable and correctable and I don't think that at this point > there > > should be any concern with not supporting browsers that are not > capable > > of html 4.0. Going back to the server for each view action causes > many > > strange page problems such as the problem that I noted with the > iframe > > behavior. > > > > Gerry Reno > > > > > > > > > > --- Stuart Belden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > IFramePortlet is too limited for what you're trying to do; what > you > > > want is something like WebSurfPortlet. > > > http://grids.ucs.indiana.edu/users/balsoy/jetspeed/ > > > > > > It allows for navigation, and the html is integrated into the > portlet > > > html itself instead of being in an iframe; I was able to adapt > > > WebSurfPortlet to our needs very well. > > > > > > > > > >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] 07/16/03 10:40AM >>> > > > Carlos, > > > That won't work. Using any of the portlet window actions will > just > > > reload the default page and even if you could remember the last > > > visited > > > url then you would somehow have to force a reloading of that page > > > which > > > in many instances when on a forms page will cause unintended side > > > effects. No, the proper place for this to be corrected is in the > > > IFramePortlet. > > > > > > Gerry Reno > > > > > > > > > --- Carlos Orrego <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > youwould have to add some code to your framed application to > > > remember > > > > in session the last visitid url. it is the only way i see it, > > > > i do not think it is a bug in jetspeed, it is the app problem > > > > > > > > c > > > > > > > > > > I opened Bugzilla Bug 21656 on this problem. > > > > > > Gerry Reno > > > > > > > > > --- Gerry Reno <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > The IFramePortlet reloading of the default page instead of > > > > remaining > > > > on the current page happens when you maximize or minimize and > then > > > > restore the portlet and even the print function suffers from > this > > > > behavior. The IFramePortlet does not appear very usable at the > > > > moment. > > > > > > > > Gerry Reno > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Aurelien Pernoud [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2003 3:56 AM > > > > To: 'Jetspeed Users List' > > > > Subject: RE: IFramePortlet maximize > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > That's the only default of the IframePortlet, but I don't know > any > > > > simple > > > > way (even any hard one) to prevent this functionment. > > > > > > > > Gerry Reno a ecrit : > > > > > > > > > I am using the IFramePortlet in one of my pages. Whenever > a > > > user > > > > > has clicked their way to a certain page that they want in the > > > > IFrame > > > > > portlet and then maximized the portlet, the portlet then > reloads > > > > the > > > > > default iframe portlet page. Is it possible to configure > this so > > > > that > > > > > the iframe portlet can maximize and keep the current page > > > > displayed? > > > > > > > > > > thx, > > > > > Gerry Reno > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: > > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > > > > > > > > > __________________________________ > > > Do you Yahoo!? > > > SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! > === message truncated === __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
