Hi,

thanks for you answer! But TFW seems to be dead, right? Can't find much
useful information about it.

Well my problem is (maybe you can help me a bit here): 

There is WSRP4J and some portals can work as wsrp producer and/or
consumer. Ok, fine.

I've read a lot of blogs and discussions and many people were not
satisfied with WSRP in the current version. (Interportlet communication
and so on).

Now the WSRP 2.0 is in development since several years and in parallel
the JSR-268. But for me it looks like WSRP is not really important for
developers. There is no development for a reference implementation of
WSRP 2.0 yet, only the pluto project tries to implement JSR-268
(although JSR-268 isn't finished yet).

This is not any kind of criticism. I only wonder: If WSRP is not the
point of interest: Is there any other technology which is doing similar
things, but maybe better than WSRP? Or is there no need for anything
like WSRP? Maybe portals aren't the solution we are looking for? 

Maybe I am completely wrong and WSRP is simply the best and the OASIS
only delays the release of WSRP 2.0 since years :) 

I am really interested in other opinions! 

Greetings

Mike
> Mike,
> 
> There was a technology called, "Task Force Web" (TFW) that did similar
> things as WSRP but was more compatible with the technology of today.
> For example:
> 
> ·        URL rewriting was done but only for HTML pages and the pages
> were contextually rewritten.
> 
> ·        The services were simply other web sites.
> 
> ·        The portlets rendered within IFrames instead of html tables.
> The advantage of this is that javacript would work properly in each
> page.  The problem was that cascading style sheets were always needed
> to be inserted into each portlet to obtain a consistent look and feel
> through the portal pages.
> 
> ·        Cookies were allowed and managed on the server (portal) that
> the client connected to.
> 
> ·        A UDDI registry was created to find services so users can
> find the services they need and render them in their respective
> portlet.
> 
>  
> 
> I hope this is helpful.
> 
>   
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Gebhart [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, November 27, 2006 12:34 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Alternative for WSRP
> 
>  
> 
> Hi,
> 
>  
> 
> I am currently exploring WSRP, especially the next specification 2.0.
> Do
> 
> you know, if there is any alternative for WSRP? Anything, that is
> doing
> 
> similar things? That I can include portlets via webservices?
> 
>  
> 
> Greetings
> 
>  
> 
> Mike
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> __________ NOD32 1886 (20061127) Information __________
> 
>  
> 
> This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
> 
> http://www.eset.com
> 
>  
> 
> 

Reply via email to