Perhaps the spec list should be made aware of the ambiguity here:
opensocial.DataRequest.PeopleRequestFields = {
/**
* An array of
* <a href="opensocial.Person.Field.html">
* <code>opensocial.Person.Field</code></a>
* specifying what profile data to fetch
* for each of the person objects. The server will always include
* ID, NAME, and THUMBNAIL_URL.
*
* @member opensocial.DataRequest.PeopleRequestFields
*/
PROFILE_DETAILS : 'profileDetail',
The error results because the pluralization is different. A developers
assumption will be wrong (as proven by the error in the test itself).
Raymond
On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 08:59 -0400, Raymond Auge wrote:
> As it turns out, after much scouring of the shindig codebase, I
> realized to my chagrin that the problem is that the
> compliancetests.xml (from code.google.com) is NOT compliant. In fact
> it has a small bug which caused the problem.
>
> See Patch attached.
>
> Ray
>
> On Wed, 2008-04-16 at 11:12 +0200, Cassie wrote:
>
> > Okay, best bet is to file a jira issue and we can look into it.
> > I'll see if I can find it now...
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 11:22 PM, Raymond Auge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > The problem is even if I specify the fields to return:
> > >
> > >
> > > personOpts[opensocial.DataRequest.PeopleRequestFields.PROFILE_DETAILS] =
> > > [opensocial.Person.Field.AGE,
> > > opensocial.Person.Field.NAME,
> > > opensocial.Person.Field.GENDER,
> > > opensocial.Person.Field.PROFILE_URL,
> > > opensocial.Person.Field.THUMBNAIL_URL,
> > > opensocial.Person.Field.STATUS];
> > >
> > > I only ever get a Set<String> profileDetails which contains:
> > >
> > > ["id","name","thumbnailUrl"]
> > >
> > >
> > > Ray
> > >
> > > On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 17:12 -0400, Raymond Auge wrote:
> > >
> > >> This is not using the sample backend... it's using a custom
> > >> implementation... the problem is that
> > >>
> > >> ["id","name","thumbnailUrl"]
> > >>
> > >> are the only fields ever requested.
> > >>
> > >> Set<String> profileDetails only ever contains those three items... of
> > >> course if I add the fields explicitly they are available, but that isn't
> > >> really what the problem is...
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Ray
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 23:07 +0200, Chris Chabot wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > The basic samplecontainer xml file has no data in those fields, and if
> > >> > the field is empty (null) it's not included in the json thats returned.
> > >> >
> > >> > If you'd open the xml file & added those fields, the warning would go
> > >> > away :)
> > >> >
> > >> > -- Chris
> > >> >
> > >> > On Apr 15, 2008, at 10:59 PM, Raymond Auge wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > If I add more supported fields to syndicators.js
> > >> > >
> > >> > > e.g.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > "person" : ["id", "name", "profileUrl", "thumbnailUrl",
> > >> > > "nickname", "emails", "gender", "phoneNumbers", "timeZone"],
> > >> > >
> > >> > > when I run the compliancetest.xml (which seems to pass all the
> > >> > > supported
> > >> > > Fields in the request) I get:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Your object did not have a result for the nickname field. This may be
> > >> > > confusing for users.
> > >> > > ...
> > >> > >
> > >> > > even though the backend does support it... seems that the fields
> > >> > > never
> > >> > > are passed in the request:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > e.g.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > [{"type":"FETCH_PEOPLE","idSpec":"OWNER","profileDetail":
> > >> > > ["id
> > >> > > ","name
> > >> > > ","thumbnailUrl"],"sortOrder":"topFriends","filter":"all","first":
> > >> > > 0,"max":20},{"type":"FETCH_PEOPLE","idSpec":"VIEWER","profileDetail":
> > >> > > ["id
> > >> > > ","name
> > >> > > ","thumbnailUrl"],"sortOrder":"topFriends","filter":"all","first":
> > >> > > 0,"max":20}]
> > >> > > [{"type":"FETCH_PEOPLE","idSpec":"VIEWER","profileDetail":
> > >> > > ["id
> > >> > > ","name
> > >> > > ","thumbnailUrl"],"sortOrder":"topFriends","filter":"all","first":
> > >> > > 0,"max":20},{"type":"FETCH_PERSON_APP_DATA","idSpec":"VIEWER","keys":
> > >> > > ["goodKey"]}]
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I take it this is known?
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Raymond Augé
> > >> > > Software Engineer
> > >> > > Liferay, Inc.
> > >> > > Enterprise. Open Source. For Life.
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >> Raymond Augé
> > >> Software Engineer
> > >> Liferay, Inc.
> > >> Enterprise. Open Source. For Life.
> > >
> > > Raymond Augé
> > > Software Engineer
> > > Liferay, Inc.
> > > Enterprise. Open Source. For Life.
> > >
> >
>
> Raymond Augé
> Software Engineer
> Liferay, Inc.
> Enterprise. Open Source. For Life.
Raymond Augé
Software Engineer
Liferay, Inc.
Enterprise. Open Source. For Life.
