That looks right. It builds ok if impl is "rpc" but once it is changed to 
"rest" it will fail.

-----Original Message-----
From: Chris Chabot [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, 3 February, 2009 10:32 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: RESTful support in java shindig

Maybe the container.js config file hasn't been updated since the local
changes conflict with svn, and thus your using an invalid config?

That bit of config should read something like:
  "opensocial-0.8" : {
    // Path to fetch opensocial data from
    // Must be on the same domain as the gadget rendering server
    "impl" : "rpc",  //Use "rpc" to enable JSON-RPC, "rest' for REST
    "path" : "http://%host%/social";,
    "domain" : "shindig",
    "enableCaja" : false,
    "supportedFields" : {
       "person" : ["id", {"name" : ["familyName", "givenName",
"unstructured"]}, "thumbnailUrl", "profileUrl"],
       "activity" : ["id", "title"]
    }
  }



On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 3:22 PM, Sean Lin <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hmmm. I am getting test failures (can't fetch person info) when trying to
> build java shindig when setting  impl = rest in container.js. It seems that
> there is still a reference to jsonBatch in restfulcontainer.js. Or is this
> some misconfiguration on my part?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Chris Chabot [mailto:[email protected]]
> Sent: Tuesday, 3 February, 2009 7:25 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: RESTful support in java shindig
>
> jsonBatch was an old, undocumented, non-spec standard that we used before
> we
> actually had a good spec in place; So once we defined the JSON-RPC spec in
> 0.8.1, we switched over to that.
>
> I'm not sure what the 'current story' is that your asking about, other then
> 'Yes it supports both the REST and RPC end points'.
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 11:23 AM, Sean Lin <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> >  What was the reason the handling of jsonBatch was removed from java
> > shindig? What is the current story with REST support?
> >
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Sean
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to