Hi Eric - > I'm not sure what you mean by this? I was able to request a token > for scope=http://docs.google.com/feeds/which worked with the > ACL feed. Is that the scope you are using?
The scope get value I'm using now (and is working) is: http%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Ffeeds%2Fdocuments%20http%3A%2F %2Fdocs.google.com%2Ffeeds%2Facl Initially I was using: http%3A%2F%2Fdocs.google.com%2Ffeeds%2Fdocuments Because the documentation said to use that. Also (and I may be the only one dumb enough to think this way), but until it came back with an error relating to scope it did not occur to me that the scope would be different than that (because, regardless of the path, the ACLs are *part* of the document -- logically if you have access to the document, you have access to the ACL for said document). It's not a big deal, I just thought there should be a note. > I think your second example should work, but there may be a reason > creating multiple ACLs wasn't implemented. I'll look into this one. Thanks for looking into it; also if there is another format for multiple ACLs, I'm more than happy to switch to that. I was sort of shooting in the dark given that I couldn't find an example of a feed creating multiple ACLs. On Nov 5, 7:46 pm, "Eric (Google)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 5, 6:02 pm, tazz_ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Anyone at Google: > > > Ok, so with some trial and error, I've got it working. A couple of > > things: > > > 1) Your documentation isn't clear. According to your document the > > header should look like this: > > > POST /feeds/acl/private/full/document%3A<your document id> HTTP/1.1 > > Host: docs.google.com > > Authorization: <your authorization header here> > > > But it will fail if you don't include a content type. So you should > > include that in your example. > > > Also I think you should make a note that if you are planning on using > > acls you need to include a separate scope item when creating the > > token. I thought that the ACL would be included in the docs scope > > because the ACL is part of the document, it wasn't until I got the > > error that I added the additional scope. > > I'm not sure what you mean by this? I was able to request a token > for scope=http://docs.google.com/feeds/which worked with the > ACL feed. Is that the scope you are using? > > > > > > > 2) There doesn't appear to be any way to add multiple ACLs at once. I > > tried: > > > <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"; xmlns:gAcl='http:// > > schemas.google.com/acl/2007'> > > <category scheme='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#kind' > > term='http://schemas.google.com/acl/2007#accessRule'/> > > <gAcl:role value='writer'/> > > <gAcl:scope type='user' value='[EMAIL PROTECTED]'/> > > </entry> > > <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"; xmlns:gAcl='http:// > > schemas.google.com/acl/2007'> > > <category scheme='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#kind' > > term='http://schemas.google.com/acl/2007#accessRule'/> > > <gAcl:role value='writer'/> > > <gAcl:scope type='user' value='[EMAIL PROTECTED]'/> > > </entry> > > > --- AND --- > > > <feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"; xmlns:gAcl='http:// > > schemas.google.com/acl/2007'> > > <entry> > > <category scheme='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#kind' > > term='http://schemas.google.com/acl/2007#accessRule'/> > > <gAcl:role value='writer'/> > > <gAcl:scope type='user' value='[EMAIL PROTECTED]'/> > > </entry> > > <entry> > > <category scheme='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#kind' > > term='http://schemas.google.com/acl/2007#accessRule'/> > > <gAcl:role value='writer'/> > > <gAcl:scope type='user' value='[EMAIL PROTECTED]'/> > > </entry> > > </feed> > > > And a few others, all resulted in "permission denied". I've programed > > around it by submitting a request for each e-mail. But this can be > > very slow, and it is just wasteful on both our parts. > > I think your second example should work, but there may be a reason > creating multiple ACLs wasn't implemented. I'll look into this one. > > Thanks, > Eric > > > > > On Nov 4, 4:25 pm, tazz_ben <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Hi Folks - > > > > I'm about to work on implementing the new ACL features, but I had a > > > couple things that I'm not clear on. Ok, the example in the docs is: > > > > POST /feeds/acl/private/full/document%3A<your document id> HTTP/1.1 > > > Host: docs.google.com > > > Authorization: <your authorization header here> > > > > <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"; xmlns:gAcl='http:// > > > schemas.google.com/acl/2007'> > > > <category scheme='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#kind' > > > term='http://schemas.google.com/acl/2007#accessRule'/> > > > <gAcl:role value='writer'/> > > > <gAcl:scope type='user' value='[EMAIL PROTECTED]'/> > > > </entry> > > > > But lets say I have a list of three people that I want to grant access > > > to, could I do this? > > > > POST /feeds/acl/private/full/document%3A<your document id> HTTP/1.1 > > > Host: docs.google.com > > > Authorization: <your authorization header here> > > > > <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"; xmlns:gAcl='http:// > > > schemas.google.com/acl/2007'> > > > <category scheme='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#kind' > > > term='http://schemas.google.com/acl/2007#accessRule'/> > > > <gAcl:role value='writer'/> > > > <gAcl:scope type='user' value='[EMAIL PROTECTED]'/> > > > </entry> > > > <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"; xmlns:gAcl='http:// > > > schemas.google.com/acl/2007'> > > > <category scheme='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#kind' > > > term='http://schemas.google.com/acl/2007#accessRule'/> > > > <gAcl:role value='writer'/> > > > <gAcl:scope type='user' value='[EMAIL PROTECTED]'/> > > > </entry> > > > <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"; xmlns:gAcl='http:// > > > schemas.google.com/acl/2007'> > > > <category scheme='http://schemas.google.com/g/2005#kind' > > > term='http://schemas.google.com/acl/2007#accessRule'/> > > > <gAcl:role value='writer'/> > > > <gAcl:scope type='user' value='[EMAIL PROTECTED]'/> > > > </entry> > > > > Also what happens if my modification conflicts with an existing role? > > > So let's say in the above that [EMAIL PROTECTED] already is a > > > collaborator. Would [EMAIL PROTECTED] and > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] still be granted access? In essence, do I > > > always have to retrieve the ACL to see what's currently going on, or > > > if my only interest is that there are particular collaborators (and > > > don't care if there is more), is actually faster to just post those > > > permissions? --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Docs Data APIs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/Google-Docs-Data-APIs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
