RE: [wsrp-interfaces][wsia][wsia-wsrp joint interfaces] Agenda fo rTuesday 30 July

-----Original Message-----
From: Alan Kropp 
  [mailto:]
Sent: Tue, July 30, 2002 
  02:27
To: ; 
  
Subject: [wsrp-interfaces][wsia][wsia-wsrp 
  joint interfaces] Agenda for T uesday 30 July

  
Over 
  the last week, these are the main open questions and consensus 
  items as I seen them.  I'd like to propose we work through as 
  much of this as we can, and then roll the remainder (as well as any new 
  questions) into the agenda for Thursday's call.  Mike, what do you 
  think?

  
 

  
 

  
1.  Generic vs. specific release 
  mechanism?  Discussion favors generic.

  
 

  
2.  HTTP cookies in the protocol?  Emerging 
  consensus against.  But discussion does favor enforcing request 
  consistency across the protocol, so how does this work in a load-balanced 
  environment?  I think it's an implementation detail, but an important one 
  that should be demonstrated asap in our proof-of-concept.

  
 

  
3.  New name for markupParameters:  
  navigationState?

  
 

  
4.  We seem to be arriving at the following 
  consensus:  Producer always manages session state, passing a handle to 
  the session to the Consumer to be used in subsequent requests.  A 
  Consumer MAY explicitly request the creation of a session, especially if it 
  knows it's going to multiplex requests to this service on behalf of many 
  clients.

  
 

  
5.  For request lifecycle, Mike's proposal is as 
  follows:  performAction redirects to the same portlet page 
  and passes changed state as markupParams in the response.  On 
  subsequent call to getMarkup, Consumer must embed the markupParams as the new 
  navigational parameters for the request, so the portlet renders the correct 
  (in sync with the most 
  recent performAction) markup.

  
 

  
As a 
  side-effect, this would require that performAction is always a blocking 
  call.

  
 

  
There hasn't been much discussion on this since, what do people 
  think?
[Gil Tayar] plus the fact that the Consumer 
  must redirect after doing the performAction, and that the 
  redirected page will do only getMarkup. 
[Gil 
  Tayar] There is an additional question which has been discussed 
  and which hasn't achieved consensus - whether getMarkup can return 
  new markupParams. 

  
I am for Mike's 
  proposition, and also think that getMarkup should not return new markupParams. 
  Nevertheless, there is a scenario where getMarkup fails because the portlet's 
  session has timed out, and thus should return new markupParams. I would 
  propose doing this as an exception returned by getMarkup because Consumer in 
  this case may have to return a redirect (just like in the performAction 
  scenario) which is drastic considering that it's handling multiple 
  getMarkups.

  
 

  
 

  
6.  How should we handle large SOAP attachments?  
  Compabitibility with .NET?  
[Gil Tayar] I would like to note that 
  there are two SOAP attachments specifications battling between themselves. One 
  is SOAP with attachments (W3) and the other is WS-Attachments. 
   I would hesitate to enter this political and defer the idea (which is a 
  very good one!) to v2 of the standard. 
  

  
 

  
7.  Factoring discussion.  This 
  seems rather abstract, I think it needs to boil down to specifics in 
  order to be useful to spec writers now.  Mike put up some proposals 
  regarding the proper axes for factoring, as well as handling 
  extensibility.  I tend to agree with his assessment.  Other 
  proposals?

  
 

  
    
Call-in 
    numbers:

    

    
USA Toll Free Number: 877-718-0936

    
USA Toll Number: +1-712-923-6878

    
PARTICIPANT PASSCODE: 563151

    
Alan