>
> I'm sorry, I still don't understand the problem here. Why do you need
> to differentiate?
>
> The important thing seems to me to decide exactly what you get if you
> do a registry.get("/foo;comments"). I would think you'd get a
> collection Resource which contains the comments as individual Atom
> entries.
In this case the return type is Resource and that resource contains
links to the comments
>
> On the wire, this is EXACTLY the same as when you do
> registry.getComments("/foo").
In this case the return type is set of comment objects.
So in the sever side APP need to decide whether it required to send a
feed with set of entries which has only a link (in the case of get) or a
feed with a set of entries having not only the link but also all the
other comment properties like user and created time (getComments).
> It's just the RemoteRegistry which does the work of unpacking the
> resulting Atom collection slightly differently to return a Resource or
> a Comment[].
>
> So what's the issue?
That is the issue :)
>
> --Glen
>
> Paul Fremantle wrote:
>> Isn't the right way to do this using Accept headers?
>>
>> The resource is the same, its just the representation that differs.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> Deepal Jayasinghe wrote:
>>> We can use get method of Registry to get resource as well as get
>>> comments and so on , so one can do something like following
>>>
>>> registry.get("/c1/c2") --> Return the resource to get resource and
>>> in the same time if he want to get the comments he can use the get
>>> method with the following path
>>> registry.get("/c1/c2;comments) --> Return the resource with comments;
>>>
>>> So Registry like JDBC and Secure know how to process that.
>>>
>>> However in the Remote registry we have some issues commands when
>>> someone called getComments() . For example when someone use remote
>>> registry and when he calls registry.getComments() we send a request
>>> like
>>> http://localhost:8080/wso2registry/c1/c2;comments
>>>
>>> And in the meantime he can use the get API to send the same request
>>> (http://localhost:8080/wso2registry/c1/c2;comments),
>>>
>>> remoteRegistry.get(
>>> http://localhost:8080/wso2registry/c1/c2;comments) -> wire URL "
>>> http://localhost:8080/wso2registry/c1/c2;comments";
>>>
>>> remoteRegistry.getComments(http://localhost:8080/wso2registry/c1/c2);
>>> ->
>>> wire URL " http://localhost:8080/wso2registry/c1/c2;comments";
>>>
>>> so when it come to server side I can not differentiate the two , though
>>> I need to do so.
>>>
>>> This problem happen we use the same parameter separator both in APP and
>>> normal registry , if we can use two characters then we can solve the
>>> problem. Therefore at the moment I am using "$" as the parameter
>>> separator in APP (according to the wiki I am supposed to use ";" )
>>>>
>>>> Deepal Jayasinghe wrote:
>>>>> Hi all ,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have implemented APP using "$" (considering the mail thread) as the
>>>>> query parameters , so if you want to get the comments we need to
>>>>> send a
>>>>> request like
>>>>>
>>>>> /c1/c2$comments
>>>>>
>>>>> However when I switch to /c1/c2;comments instead of
>>>>> /c1/c2$comments I
>>>>> found an issue in the app impl . Because in the registry get api has
>>>>> support for /c1/c2;comments , so rather than using getComment
>>>>> method one
>>>>> can use get method to get the comments. This become big issue when it
>>>>> come to remote registry , where I can not differentiate the two ,
>>>>> though
>>>>> it is required to do so. So how about using a different query
>>>>> parameter
>>>>> character for get method of the registry API?
>>>>>
>>>>> -Deepal
>>>>>> I have created a wiki page for registry protocol at
>>>>>> http://www.wso2.org/wiki/display/registry/Registry+Protocol
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Registry URL space and the APP based message formats discussed in
>>>>>> the
>>>>>> Registry hackathan are included in the wiki.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>> Chathura
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Registry-dev mailing list
>>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/registry-dev
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Registry-dev mailing list
>>>>> [email protected]
>>>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/registry-dev
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Registry-dev mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/registry-dev
>>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Registry-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/registry-dev
>
>
_______________________________________________
Registry-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/registry-dev
