[wsrp] Change requests for Thursday, March 27th

The change requests (and current email
discussion summaries) for the call are: 

#237(b): Alternative for supporting a control set style

 => Discussion of how the Consumer can inform the
Portlet of the controls "normally" in use for the mode/window
state. 

#240: Remove Interface.UnsupportedLocale fault 

  => Discussion has come down to either we
should:

    1. tighten up the semantics around locales
(Consumer MUST select from the set declared as supported through the PortletDescription,
etc.) ... this would keep the fault definition.

    2. Leave locales as a prioritized request
and allow the Portlet to return any locale ... this would remove the fault
definition.

#242: Logic of 127 chars recommendation
unclear.

  => Suggestion looks to
add clarity as to why the first 127 characters are recommended.

#243: extensions field description

  => Request breaks the
one sentence description of the extensions field into 2 in order to clearly
state that extensions elements MUST come from a non-wsrp namespace.

#244: Back door to declaring charsets
for MarkupTypes

  => Should the spec comment
on the mime type can include optional declarations such as charset?

#245: UserScope and caching

  => Is a Consumer prohibited
or discouraged from caching content when it does not understand the specified
userScope?

#246: userProfileItemDescriptions
rename

  => Consistency says this
field should be customUserProfileItemsDescriptions

#247: Rename binding wsdl file

  => Noting that for consistency,
this filename should use the plural "bindings".

#248: Section CSS classes

  => Question raised whether
to define a parallel set of classes that are table specific?

#249: Class name length impact
on performance

  => Request by the "performance
police" that the class names be shortened.

#250: Only 1 performBlockingInteraction()
per End-User interaction?

  => What is the harm as
long as the blocking semantics are followed? Also, this conflicts with
the required semantics of receiving back an InvalidSession or InvalidCookie
fault message.

#???: redirectURL mutually exclusive
with interactionResponse

  => discussion thread
(not a formal change request) questioning whether all of the UpdateResponse
structure should be mutually exclusive with redirectURL.

Others that may still arrive .....

Rich Thompson