I believe Glenn proposed something like this:
http://host/jetspeed/portal/template/PortalEntry/peid/7 The template seems like extra, but it's a way to specify that you are requesting an alternative aggregation than the default screen. I suppose that we could cut that shorter, and use http://host/jetspeed/portal/PortalEntry/7 The above examples works for the anonymous user (or the currently logged on user) You could also access common group or role resources http://host/jetspeed/portal/group/Apache/template/PortalEntry/peid/9 Or http://host/jetspeed/portal/group/Apache/PortalEntry/9 Or to get a specific portlet on a specific page in the Apache group http://host/jetspeed/portal/group/Apache/page/news/PortalEntry/9 I believe we can skip "template/PortalEntry" with a common action (SessionValidator), that always soft-redirects to the PortalEntry screen/layout when it sees the PortalEntry parameter. (I've never tried soft redirects with a layout...but I assume it works) > -----Original Message----- > From: Bill Barnhill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 6:23 PM > To: Jetspeed Developers List > Subject: Re: Jetspeed Proposal: iframe portlet control > > > What's needed is a way to uniquely identify the portlet markup (a xml > fragment) and the file that markup resides in. Rather than > generating our own unique ID service, what about using a URI > for the file and xpath for the portlet markup. You could > actually write the URL extensions to handle a portlet:// > scheme so that the content generated by any portlet could be > accessed as easily as the content of any http:// URL. This > could even be extended such that remote portlets could be > accessed via RMI. > > What do you think? > > . > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "David Sean Taylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "'Jetspeed Developers List'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 12:59 PM > Subject: RE: Jetspeed Proposal: iframe portlet control > > > > > <include portal="/shared/finance/template" peid="23">. > > > > +1 on that. I need to implement this exact feature next week.... > > > > > I vote for unique within a psml only. > > > > +1 - although if we ever put psml in the database, completely > > +normalised > > (right now its stored as blobs), system wide unique ids would be > > better I guess when we do that, which is no easy task, we > can revisit > > the uniqueness issue > > > > > I also vote for integer (long) format, where the root > element is by > > > convention #1 or #0, and all others are whatever they end > up being. > > > > Are you saying Integer format, are actual integers in the > api. Should > > I change the api from > > > > String getID() > > > > To > > > > long getID() > > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Glenn Golden [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 12:55 PM > > > To: 'Jetspeed Developers List' > > > Subject: RE: Jetspeed Proposal: iframe portlet control > > > > > > > > > Seems to me there's one other open question, that of id scope: > > > > > > - unique within a psml > > > - unique on a jetspeed server. > > > > > > While I like the idea of being able to include parts in > many psml's, > > > which unique on server supports, I think in general > unique on server > > > is more difficult, would make it harder to move psml > files around, > > > and is more than what we really need. > > > > > > We could have in include mechanism to share parts, whoich > would use > > > the local uid and portal id together, such as <include > > > portal="/shared/finance/template" peid="23">. > > > > > > * * * > > > > > > I vote for unique within a psml only. > > > > > > I also vote for integer (long) format, where the root > element is by > > > convention #1 or #0, and all others are whatever they end > up being. > > > > > > The psml file reader can, while reading each psml, keep > track of the > > > largest id to use when a new one is needed, stored in the root > > > element or not. > > > > > > - Glenn > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: David Sean Taylor [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] > > > Sent: Wednesday, March 06, 2002 1:32 PM > > > To: 'Jetspeed Developers List' > > > Subject: RE: Jetspeed Proposal: iframe portlet control > > > > > > > > > To summarize the plan for portlet ids: > > > > > > - change all psml files to have a unique id > > > - if a psml file doesn't have an id, the toolkit service will add > > > the id (but the id doesn't get stored until its customized) > > > - write a conversion utility > > > - start converting all $links and references everywhere > to use the > > > portlet id (this will be a lot of changes....) > > > - customizer > > > - all controllers and controls that reference > > > subelements (menus, panes, tabs) > > > - actions (minimize, maximize,etc) > > > - try to come-up with a formalised way to set query > params and post > > > parameters so that they only go to a specific portlet (based on > > > portlet-id). One use-case is to put two HelloVelocity portlets on > > > the same page and make sure that only one updates. > > > > > > Still remaining question. What is the format of the id (vote): > > > > > > - hex > > > - integer > > > - dot notation as described by Santiago > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > <mailto:jetspeed-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > For > > > additional commands, > > > e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > -- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > > > <mailto:jetspeed-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > For > > > additional commands, > > > e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > For additional commands, e-mail: > <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > > > -- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: > <mailto:jetspeed-dev-> [EMAIL PROTECTED]> > For > additional commands, > e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
