The file structure for  the widgets is identical, only the config.xml
differs. Using lzt=widget will generate all the files necessary for a
widget. The 2nd parameter is used only to handle the config.xml. An
Opera Widget and a JIL widget still are the same runtime (same JS
file, HTML page, etc.). The 2nd parameter is useful if you have a
custom widget format which is not known by OpenLaszlo. Let's say, XYZ
widget standard. Even if the OpenLaszlo server doesn't know about that
standard, someone could place a xyz.config.xml into the the folder
with the LZX file, compile and would get the widget generated.

On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 11:24 AM, Quirino Zagarese
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Then why not simply using lzt=operawidget, lzt=jilwidget?
> This would be consistent with the swf approach, keeping
> Raju's proposal feasable. If you have lzt=widget and widgettype is
> unbound, then you should default to one of the options or raise an
> error.
> Regards,
>
> Quirino
>
> 2010/8/6 Raju Bitter <[email protected]>
>>
>> Henry,
>>
>> do you think the widget should be rendered into the same directory?
>> Say my url is:
>>
>> localhost:8080/olserver/somemapp/app.lzx?lzt=widget
>>
>> If we generate all the widget files into the same folder as the
>> application, that would be technically the easiest solution, since no
>> redirect is involved. But if we have different widget types (Opera,
>> W3C, JIL), and we'd attacht a ?lzt=widget&widgettype=jil, maybe it
>> would be better to create a subfolder (opera,w3cwidget,jil), and place
>> all the files into that folder. Then send a redirect to the newly
>> create or already existing widget folder. The idea is really to have a
>> URL stored in your browser favorites, and to be able to point
>> Chrome/Ripple to just that URL and automatically load the widget into
>> the emulator.
>>
>> If we support &widgetttype=???, the convention could be: We have
>> templates for Opera, JIL, Bondi and W3C widget in the
>> lps/widgets/templates folder. Those would be used to generate the
>> widget, unless the user creates a custom config.xml in the same folder
>> where the LZX file lives. Convention would be:
>>
>> ?lzt=widget&widgettype=jil > looks for a jil.config.xml in the LZX folder
>> ?lzt=widget&widgettype=opera > looks for a opera.config.xml in the LZX
>> folder
>> ?lzt=widget&widgettype=w3cwidget > looks for a w3cwidget.config.xml in
>> the LZX folder
>> and so one. If we have a new widget standards coming up, that
>> mechanism could be easily extended.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 6, 2010 at 4:15 AM, Henry Minsky <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> > we could do that...
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:26 PM, P T Withington <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> I like that idea!  lzt=widget
>> >>
>> >> On 2010-08-05, at 19:01, Raju Bitter wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Yes, agree with Tucker. If you want a SOLO app, an index.html is a
>> >> > good option as well.
>> >> >
>> >> > But when you are testing widgets, it would come in handy to be able
>> >> > to
>> >> > generate the whole widget packet exploded into one folder, returning
>> >> > the config.xml. That's the way you could directly load an OL app into
>> >> > a browser emulator like Ripple. Using lzt=widget for example.
>> >> >
>> >> > On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 9:37 PM, P T Withington <[email protected]> wrote:
>> >> >> Yes we should do this.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> See http://jira.openlaszlo.org/jira/browse/LPP-9148
>> >> >>
>> >> >> I think it is right to use index.html.  It seems much more likely
>> >> >> that
>> >> >> someone will be making a widget than a solo app.  If they are really
>> >> >> making
>> >> >> a solo app, they are more likely to be writing a custom wrapper
>> >> >> page.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> On 2010-08-05, at 15:32, Henry Minsky wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>> The W3C widget format is a standard, and very close to what we're
>> >> >>> emitting
>> >> >>> for SOLO zip archives.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Should we just switch the SOLO deployer scripts over to the W3C
>> >> >>> format
>> >> >>> ?
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> The only difference that I can see at the moment Opera (the only
>> >> >>> browser
>> >> >>> that runs widgets that I know of)
>> >> >>> requires currently that the start file be named as "index.html",
>> >> >>> whereas
>> >> >>> we've been making the solo deployer generate
>> >> >>> a file named "yourapp.lzx.html".
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> --
>> >> >>> Henry Minsky
>> >> >>> Software Architect
>> >> >>> [email protected]
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >> >>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Henry Minsky
>> > Software Architect
>> > [email protected]
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Quirino Zagarese
>
> PhD Student - Department of Engineering - University of Sannio
>
> Italian OpenLaszlo Community  - www.laszloitalia.org
>
> EU4RIA: Laszlo+Java, easily - eu4ria.googlecode.com
>

Reply via email to