PHP Shindig def does support the metadata call, see
http://modules.partuza.nl/gadgets/files/container/sample-metadata.html as
example. If there's something missing in the response structure, please file
a JIRA issue for that.
Json-RPC is being worked on, and hope to have that in somewhere next week.
2008/9/18 Astha Bhatnagar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Hi Ben,
> As per the samplecontiner code
>
> function generateGadgets(metadata) {
> // TODO: The gadget.js file should really have a clearGadgets method
> gadgets.container.gadgets_ = {};
> for (var i = 0; i < metadata.gadgets.length; i++) {
> gadget = gadgets.container.createGadget(
> {'specUrl': metadata.gadgets[i].url, 'title':
> metadata.gadgets[i].title});
> gadget.setServerBase('../../');
> gadget.secureToken = escape(generateSecureToken());
> gadgets.container.addGadget(gadget);
> }
>
> gadgets.container.layoutManager.setGadgetChromeIds(['gadget-chrome']);
> reloadStateFile(function() {
> gadgets.container.renderGadgets();
> });
> };
>
> I think what they have done is something like Tamlyn Rhodes has suggested
> in
> this thread
>
> var gadgetDefaultPrefs = {};
>
> for (var prefName in gadgetMetadata.userPrefs) {
> gadgetDefaultPrefs[prefName] =
> gadgetMetadata.userPrefs[prefName].default;
> }
> var gadget = gadgets.container.getGadget(gadgetId);
> gadget.setUserPrefs(gadgetDefaultPrefs);
> gadget.refresh();
>
> Java Shindig is supporting JsonRpc and so gadget/metadata call. That's why
> its working properly in Java Shindig and PHP side its still not supported
> and hence its not working with PHP Shindig (even sample container it self
> not working with PHP Shindig).
>
> Anybody please correct me if I am wrong :)
>
> 2008/9/18 ben bonfil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > To all involved in this thread,
> > Can you conclude on the preferred way to do this? I have just ran into a
> > problem with my solution ( created a bug report actually, though I guess
> > it's not really valid -
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SHINDIG-613)
> >
> > Before I go ahead and fix it, I'd like to know what is the correct way to
> > initialize the userprefs, and whether it was already patched in the
> latest
> > revision (didn't see anything related to it on the SVN log)
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Ben
> >
> > 2008/9/14 ben bonfil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >
> > > Hi,
> > > I've attached the patch for the method that I use.
> > >
> > > Ben
> > >
> > >
> > > 2008/9/12 John Hjelmstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > >> That's fair. So long as prefs.js doesn't parse the URL but instead
> > accepts
> > >> only the prefs values the server provides, we're golden.
> > >>
> > >> 2008/9/12 Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >>
> > >> > 2008/9/12 John Hjelmstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >> >
> > >> > > I could be misunderstanding, but it sounds like that's what Ben
> did
> > --
> > >> > pass
> > >> > > (in the server) the defaults to setMessages_ with some special
> > format,
> > >> > and
> > >> > > have prefs.js read them when no up_<key> values are provided on
> the
> > >> URL.
> > >> > > Meanwhile, UP substitution is already handled by the server, with
> a
> > >> merge
> > >> > > algorithm that presumably mirrors what Ben's does in JS.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > Yeah, and I think that's error prone. We should be doing the merging
> > in
> > >> > just
> > >> > one place, or we're going to have bugs.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > >
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -John
> > >> > >
> > >> > > 2008/9/12 Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > That's not a complete solution because it skips user pref
> > >> substitution.
> > >> > > The
> > >> > > > only thing that completely allows skipping filling in the user
> > pref
> > >> > > > defaults
> > >> > > > in the url is to make the user prefs merge happen server side.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > 2008/9/11 ben bonfil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > My solution was indeed to pass the default values in the
> > >> setMessages_
> > >> > > > > array(like iGoogle), and modify prefs.js accordingly.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > Ben Bonfil
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > On 9/12/08, John Hjelmstad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > > > > > Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only server-side code that
> > >> touches
> > >> > > > > > gadgets.Prefs initializes it with Messages (setMessages_),
> not
> > >> > Prefs
> > >> > > at
> > >> > > > > all,
> > >> > > > > > all of which are initialized by parsing
> > >> > > > gadgets.util.getUrlParameters().
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > I don't have any strong opinion on implementation
> particulars
> > -
> > >> > > either
> > >> > > > > way
> > >> > > > > > server-side code spits out defaults and some corresponding
> JS
> > >> reads
> > >> > > > > them...
> > >> > > > > > assuming we want to support this in the first place.
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > -John
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > > > On 9/11/08, Kevin Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >> That's wholly unnecessary. If we want gadgets.Prefs to
> > include
> > >> > > > defaults,
> > >> > > > > >> we
> > >> > > > > >> just need to make the server side code that outputs
> > >> gadgets.Prefs
> > >> > > > > properly
> > >> > > > > >> merge in the defaults from the spec. There's no reason to
> add
> > >> new
> > >> > > > client
> > >> > > > > >> libraries.
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >> On Thu, Sep 11, 2008 at 3:01 PM, John Hjelmstad <
> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >> > Given that default values for a given gadget fixed in the
> > >> spec,
> > >> > I
> > >> > > > > think
> > >> > > > > >> the
> > >> > > > > >> > cleaner solution is to inject some kind of defaultPrefs
> > >> object
> > >> > > into
> > >> > > > > the
> > >> > > > > >> > gadget when rendering it, somewhat like
> > gadgets.config.init()
> > >> > > does.
> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > >> > As implemented today (which admittedly isn't the cleanest
> > >> impl,
> > >> > > but
> > >> > > > > >> that's
> > >> > > > > >> > an orthogonal problem), that would mean modifying
> > >> > > > GadgetRenderingTask
> > >> > > > > to
> > >> > > > > >> do
> > >> > > > > >> > something like:
> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
> js.append("gadgets.Prefs.setDefaults(").append(jsonObjectRepresentingDefaultsOf(gadget.getSpec()).append(");\n");
> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > >> > ...then augmenting features/core/prefs.js correspondingly
> > to
> > >> > > > > initialize
> > >> > > > > >> > from
> > >> > > > > >> > defaults when the up_<key> equivalent isn't available.
> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > >> > --John
> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > >> > On 9/10/08, Cassie <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> > >
> > >> > > > > >> > > (in case you are interested - don't feel pressured
> though
> > >> :)
> > >> > > > > >> > >
> > >> > > > > >> > > samplecontainer.js actually already makes calls to the
> > >> > metadata
> > >> > > > > >> servlet.
> > >> > > > > >> > > see
> > >> > > > > >> > > line 167 - the "requestGadgetMetaData" function. This
> > came
> > >> > from
> > >> > > a
> > >> > > > > >> > different
> > >> > > > > >> > > patch which gave the samplecontainer the ability to
> show
> > >> > gadget
> > >> > > > > >> > > titles.
> > >> > > > > >> > >
> > >> > > > > >> > > - Caszsie
> > >> > > > > >> > >
> > >> > > > > >> > >
> > >> > > > > >> > >
> > >> > > > > >> > > On Wed, Sep 10, 2008 at 6:48 AM, Tamlyn Rhodes <
> > >> > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > > > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> > >
> > >> > > > > >> > > > On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 6:55 PM, Cassie <
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >> > > wrote:
> > >> > > > > >> > > > > Hey Tamlyn - do you think you could make this into
> a
> > >> patch
> > >> > > and
> > >> > > > > >> attach
> > >> > > > > >> > > it
> > >> > > > > >> > > > to
> > >> > > > > >> > > > > a jira issue for Shindig?
> > >> > > > > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > >> > > > The thing is I've done it from outside of gadgets.js
> so
> > >> it's
> > >> > > not
> > >> > > > > >> > > > really patchable. Doing it in gadgets.js would mean
> > >> making
> > >> > an
> > >> > > > ajax
> > >> > > > > >> > > > call to fetch the metadata in the
> > >> > gadgets.container.addGadget
> > >> > > > > method
> > >> > > > > >> > > > and I'm not really sure how that would work since
> > >> > > > gadgets.ioisn't
> > >> > > > > >> > > > available in the container (unless i've
> misunderstood).
> > >> > > > > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > >> > > > I'm aware that you're keen to maintain clear
> separation
> > >> > > between
> > >> > > > > >> > > > Shindig and the JavaScript code that manages the
> > >> > layout/chrome
> > >> > > > but
> > >> > > > > >> for
> > >> > > > > >> > > > most people actually using Shindig I suspect this
> > >> separation
> > >> > > is
> > >> > > > > >> rather
> > >> > > > > >> > > > more theoretical than practical. I've been developing
> a
> > >> drag
> > >> > &
> > >> > > > > drop
> > >> > > > > >> > > > layout/framework using jQuery, PHP and MySQL and I
> hope
> > >> to
> > >> > > open
> > >> > > > > >> source
> > >> > > > > >> > > > this once I get it working. This should be some time
> in
> > >> > > > September.
> > >> > > > > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > >> > > > Tamlyn.
> > >> > > > > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > >> > >
> > >> > > > > >> >
> > >> > > > > >>
> > >> > > > > >
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>
