Why not just use the json rpc batching protocol that everyone worked so hard
on?
{method: person.get, userId : @owner, etc etc}
Then we don't have yet another syntax floating around.
- Cassie
On Thu, Sep 18, 2008 at 2:54 PM, Evan Gilbert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The group working on OpenSocial templates is working on a proposal for how
> to declaratively define the set of data passed into templates.
>
> In discussions, it looks like OpenSocial may need a declarative syntax in
> other places:
>
> - Data preloading
> - (possibly) to define what data gets sent to the 3rd party server for
> the type="proxied" proposal
>
> Because this impacts other parts of the spec, we'd like to encourage people
> interested in this topic to get involved in the design. There will be
> opportunity to give input at all phases of the process, and the final
> decision is always put up to a vote on the main spec list. However we'd much
> prefer to hear your feedback sooner.
>
> An example of the kind of syntax we're looking at:
>
> - Replacing
> req.add(req.newFetchPersonRequest(opensocial.IdSpec.PersonId.OWNER),
> "get_owner");
> - With <os:PersonRequest key="get_owner" id="OWNER">
>
> and links:
>
> - Template discusison group:
> http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/os-templates/
> - In progress proposal for pipelining:
>
> http://wiki.opensocial-templates.org/index.php?title=OpenSocial_Data_Pipelining
>
>
> So... please get involved if you have ideas about how data requests should
> be defined.
>
> Evan
>
>
>
> --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "OpenSocial and Gadgets Specification Discussion" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/opensocial-and-gadgets-spec?hl=en
> -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
>
>
