Robots can now see the entire conversation upon addition, by adding a context="children" to the "WAVELET_SELF_ADDED event in capabilities.xml according to cmdskp. I've not tested it, but from the feedback it appears to work intermittently this is probably because the whole child-parent thing and context thing are both in early beta and subject to change without notice, meaning that we're trying to shoot a moving target, as cmdskp said.
On Nov 24, 12:03 pm, David Nesting <da...@fastolfe.net> wrote: > This sounds easily achievable with a robot. For each event, the robot > checks to see if the edit is authorized, and if not, reverts it to the last > known authorized edit. The caveats: > > 1. Depending on which blips you want to lock, the robot may need to be added > prior to an authorized edit, for it to see the content (since all of the > blips in a wave aren't normally sent with events). > 2. You'll effectively need to store your own copy of the content of all of > the blips locked in this manner. The storage burden may be significant. > 3. Wave has no functionality to authenticate events[1], so it would be > possible for someone to forge an event to your robot containing a fake > "authorized" edit to a blip (or an unlock command), causing your robot to > accept the edit. It also allows someone to read blips in a wave they don't > have permission to see, assuming they could get their hands on the wave ID, > by submitting a bogus edit event to that blip and watching what your robot > reverts its content to. > > David > > [1]http://code.google.com/p/google-wave-resources/issues/detail?id=344 > > > > On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 8:18 AM, Akiva <akiva.m.co...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I know Wave does not allow users to lock the text of their original > > blips. Could someone build a robot that would, when enabled, watch > > the text of particular blips for edits and restore the original text > > if edits are made? This is of particular interest to me because I'm > > considering opening a number of public waves on political issues, and > > that's exactly the sort of contentious public debate where bad actors > > would be likely to alter an author's post in order to discredit them. > > > -- > > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Google Wave API" group. > > To post to this group, send email to google-wave-...@googlegroups.com. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > google-wave-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com<google-wave-api%2Bunsubscribe@ > > googlegroups.com> > > . > > For more options, visit this group at > >http://groups.google.com/group/google-wave-api?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Wave API" group. To post to this group, send email to google-wave-...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to google-wave-api+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/google-wave-api?hl=en.
