Hi Chris,
I don't think the restful request respects the spec regarding the
default fields as in java side the default fields are added to the set only if
the fields requested by the developer is empty. So if the developer requests
only ID, it is passed as is. The javascript side does exactly what the spec
says by adding Id, name and thumbnailUrl no matter what.
I understand deviating from spec is bad practice but with current settings
there is noway to just get ID's of thousand or so friends for a person.
Thanks for your quick response.
Praveen Neppalli Naga
--- On Mon, 11/10/08, Chris Chabot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> From: Chris Chabot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: Opensocial Person PROFILE_DETAILS:- Shindig implementation of
> default person fields.
> To: [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Date: Monday, November 10, 2008, 1:28 PM
> the javascript configuration is also injected almost as-is
> into the gadget
> document, and serves as the basis for the supportedFields
> and alike calls,
> so this has a different function as the
> 'configuration' in the code.
>
> Also this javascript configuration defines which fields are
> available (from
> the gadget js api point of view) and doesn't define the
> 'default set of
> fields' (as far as i'm aware)
>
> Normally a container would list the fields that are
> supported in the
> container.js file, implement those fields in his data
> adapters, and it's
> done.
>
> The demand for being able to change the default fields is
> quite low as you
> could expect, since this makes it deviate from the spec :)
>
> Since deviating from the spec is something I don't feel
> should be
> encouraged, I don't think we need any configuration for
> this since this
> would only encourage very 'bad' behavior (from a
> spec compliance point of
> view).
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 12:04 PM, praveen n.n.
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>
> > When fetching a person or friends, there is an option
> to specify the person
> > fields that the app developer can request. The spec
> mentions that the server
> > will always include ID, NAME, and THUMBNAIL_URL.
> >
> > But in case I want to change this default list to
> something else(which
> > makes me deviate form spec, but there are few reason I
> want to), shindig
> > implementation doesn't allow me to change this
> gracefully.
> >
> > Now the question,
> >
> > There are two places the default fields are injected,
> one is in java script
> > side and another is in java side in PersonHandler.java
> and both of them are
> > hard coded. I understand the reason for injecting
> default fields in java
> > side and it is to support Restful request that
> apparently also supports Json
> > requests. Is there any reason its also injected in
> javascript side? to
> > support PHP?
> > Also the implementation in javascript side is
> different from java side. In
> > javascript the default fields are injected no matter
> what the developer
> > specifies in the fields in the person request but in
> java side the default
> > fields are injected only if the developer doesn't
> specify anything in the
> > fields. So for a same kind of request json request
> will behave differently
> > compared to restful request. Any thoughts on this?
> >
> > And any plan to make this configurable? If yes I have
> a patch for java
> > side. will it be better to do this in Java side and
> PHP side alone and
> > remove it from javascript?
> >
> > Let me know if this needs more explanation and
> specific details.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Praveen Neppalli Naga
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
