> From: Tony Collen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > It hadn't occured to me that this was a problem with wsproxy. I
> just thought
> > I needed to do something to convert the format. But then I
> realized that I
> > had to manually change my all my "&"s to "&"s. Which format
> should the
> > user be expected to use for the src attribute of the generator?
> It seems to
> > me the more human-readable form makes the most sense, with encoding
> > happening in the wsproxy.
>
>
> Jeff,
>
> Could you try the following test and tell me if you get search results?
Worked great! Thanks!
> In your sitemap (Note the YOUR_AMAZON_KEY in the global-variables):
>
> <map:pipelines>
>
> <map:component-configurations>
> <global-variables>
> <amazon-key>YOUR_AMAZON_KEY</amazon-key>
> </global-variables>
> </map:component-configurations>
Elegant. I like it...
> <map:pipeline>
> <map:match pattern="*.html">
> <map:read src="{1}.html" mime-type="text/html"/>
> </map:match>
>
> <map:match pattern="actorSearch">
> <map:generate type="wsproxy"
> src="http://xml.amazon.com/onca/xml3?t=webservices-20&dev-t={g
> lobal:amazon-key}&&mode=vhs&type=lite&page=1&f=xml"/>
> <map:serialize type="xml"/>
> </map:match>
>
> </map:pipeline>
>
> </map:pipelines>
Ok, interesting. You took the parameters out. Must be passed implicitly...
> And then use the following form.html file:
>
> <html><body>
> <form method="post" action="actorSearch">
> <input type="text" name="ActorSearch" />
> <input type="submit"/>
> </form>
> </body></html>
>
> I think what is happening in your example is that when you use
> {request-param:actor}, that is being
> decoded by the RequestParameterInputModule, and is therefore
> being sent unencoded to Amazon (I could
> be wrong on this). The WSProxy automatically sends all request
> parameters which were sent from the
> original form, so if you have a field called "ActorSearch" in
> your field, the WSProxy will also send
> ActorSearch=foo to the remote service.
Interesting. What happens if I don't want to pass my parameters along?
> This is nice, but it's not always useful if you don't want to use
> Amazon's form field names, so I
> can see why you might have wanted to use the different input name
> in your form. AFAIK, it's up to
> the "sender" of the URL to make sure that request parameter names
> and values are URL-encoded, so I
> am debating whether this might warrant an input module which
> performs URL encoding.
>
> Thoughts?
I wish I understood the Cocoon code better. I'd like to take a look at
it--especially with your help. I see you've posted a couple of other things
today, so I'm not sure if you've moved on from this proposed solution. In
any case I'm all ears...
> Regards,
Thanks again for digging into this...
> Tony
Jeff
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
