On 11 Jul 2011, at 22:07, Ross Gardler wrote:

> On 11 July 2011 17:42, Franklin, Matthew B. <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On 5/19/11 6:49 PM, "Ross Gardler" <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 19/05/2011 18:33, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>>> I have committed the implementation of this concept.  There is now a
>>>> rave.w3c package that contains a W3C RegionWidgetRender and a skeleton
>>>> implementation of a WidgetService that can be completed to communicate
>>>> with Wookie.  The way this is implemented, the renderer will call the
>>>> WidgetService to get the widget instance and then pass a javascript
>>>> widget
>>>> object to the w3c javascript.  This can easily be changed to do whatever
>>>> is best for Wookie rendered widgets.
>>>> 
>>>> In the future, the renderer can be extended to support inline widget
>>>> rendering.
>>> 
>>> I hate it (and love it) when that happens.
>>> 
>>> I don't (current) develop for a living any more*. I've implemented
>>> something similar to this, but it is incomplete and since I've not been
>>> a real programmer for about 10 years I'm having to learn lots of cool
>>> new (at least to me) things.
>>> 
>>> Now I won't get to commit my code :-(
>>> 
>>> Of course, your code is better than mine and I've learned loads in my
>>> experiments. I'll merge the two together when I get chance.
>> 
>> Hi Ross, do you think you will be able to tackle this before the end of
>> July release?  If not, is there something that we can do to help?  Maybe
>> commit your code to a branch and we can integrate it?
> 
> To be honest I can't remember the state I had it in. the primary
> technical problem is that the Java connector needed has not yet been
> released by Wookie and so a Rave release cannot include it. There is a
> vote underway over on Wookie right now for a release so that will be
> resolved soon.
> 
> That leaves the other problem of my time to finish the work. I am well
> and truly swamped right now and I'm not going to finish it anytime
> soon. I know I was 80% there (meaning the hard 20% needs to be done).
> I think a branch would be overkill, but I can dump a patch into the
> issue tracker and if someone wants to finish it off then fine.
> 
> Let me grab an hour somewhere to do this (I have loads of travelling
> this week so I may even get to finish it as I like to hack when
> travelling).

If it isn't finished I'd be happy to take a look and see if I can get it 
working - it shouldn't be too difficult. The main issue I think was as you say 
getting access to the connector framework via Maven when it isn't published yet.

> 
> Ross
> 
> 
> 
>> 
>> -Matt
>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks Matt
>>> 
>>> Ross
>>> 
>>> * interestingly this will be changing for a few days a month in the
>>> coming months - I'm so excited to get some paid programming time back in
>>> my life
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> -Matt
>>>> 
>>>> On 5/17/11 8:19 AM, "Franklin, Matthew B."<[email protected]>  wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> SharedDataKey. It's possible that multiple users will have the same
>>>>>>>> keys.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> OK.  I looked over the API docs and what I propose is that we defer
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> call to wookie to when we render the page.  When we are outputting
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> list of widgets to the page, there is some natural conversion to the
>>>>>>> Javascript representation of the widget instance (as a string).  If
>>>>>>> we
>>>>>>> had
>>>>>>> a rendering facility that kept a handle on a map of widget converters
>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>> widget type, we could call to it to build the string that we inject
>>>>>>> into
>>>>>>> the page's script block as we are iterating over the RegionWidgets
>>>>>>> in a
>>>>>>> Region.  This way, we can have a W3C widget serializer that caches
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> calls to /wookie/widgetinstances for a given user, SharedDataKey, etc
>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>> we don't have to re-plumb the object model or service layer to
>>>>>>> support
>>>>>>> what is in essence a rendering function.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Usually not a fan of tags, but in this case, it might be worth it...
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thoughts?
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Sounds a plausible solution, but I think I'll understand it better in
>>>>>> code :-)
>>>>> 
>>>>> Ross was going to build the Wookie connectors. I will build the
>>>>> rendering
>>>>> piece, so long as that does not conflict with what he is doing as part
>>>>> of
>>>>> the Wookie connectors.  Ross?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
> Programme Leader (Open Development)
> OpenDirective http://opendirective.com

Reply via email to