[OpenAjaxIDE] Bootstrapping

Jonathan Bond-Caron jbondc at gdesolutions.com
Wed Oct 24 05:05:09 PDT 2007


I agree with all points though I'm also uneasy about the naming. 

 

As a convention, something like the following could be interesting: 

Ms:

OpenAjaxLib.xml    -> ms.library.xml

OpenAjaxWidget.xml -> ms.toolkit.PasswordStrength.xml

OpenAjaxAPI.xml    -> ms.toolkit.PasswordStrength.api.xml OR? ms.toolkit.PasswordStrength.doc.xml

 

Spry:

OpenAjaxLib.xml    -> spry.library.xml

OpenAjaxWidget.xml -> spry.widgets.Tooltip.xml

OpenAjaxAPI.xml    -> spry.widgets.Tooltip.api.xml OR? spry.widgets.Tooltip.doc.xml

 

...

 

I was happily surprised by the w3c widgets draft and how they plan to deal with widget 'resources':

http://www.w3.org/TR/widgets/#widget0

 

Somewhere along these line, it would be nice to allow automatic discovery by reading the library’s xml or unpacking a container and

discovering new required resources.

 

i.e.         Based on ooa registry?

<resource Id="YAHOO" type="library" uri="file://YAHOO/YAHOO.library.xml <file:///\\YAHOO\YAHOO.library.xml> " /> 

                <resource Id="Spry" type="library" uri="file://Spry/Spry.library.xml <file:///\\Spry\Spry.library.xml> " />

<resource Id="ms" type="library" uri="http://somewhere/ms.library.zip" />

 

 

From: ide-bounces at openajax.org [mailto:ide-bounces at openajax.org] On Behalf Of Rich Thompson
Sent: October 23, 2007 4:54 PM
To: ide at openajax.org
Subject: Re: [OpenAjaxIDE] Bootstrapping

 


I too would prefer to not start by doing separations where we do not have well developed reasons for the distinctions. It is likely some such distinctions will arise as we move forward and that seems like the appropriate time to separate the information. 

I also wonder about an approach that seems to be focused on a downloaded directory structure. In particular I'm concerned about how it maps to a web widget model. What about more of a URI approach where "discovering" the widget/component/library means one has been handed a defined set of metadata. This could be by ingesting the response from a URI or by reading a file. If it makes sense to partition the metadata, this top level set can point to other metadata (and thereby also support deferred loading of unused information ...). 

Rich Thompson





From: 

Bertrand Le Roy <Bertrand.Le.Roy at microsoft.com> 


To: 

Jon Ferraiolo/Menlo Park/IBM at IBMUS 


Cc: 

"ide at openajax.org" <ide at openajax.org> 


Date: 

10/23/2007 04:35 PM 


Subject: 

Re: [OpenAjaxIDE] Bootstrapping

 

  _____  




Well, it’s also still not clear to me why we need different formats for lib, api and widgets. What’s the difference between lib and api? 
  
From: Jon Ferraiolo [ <mailto:jferrai at us.ibm.com> mailto:jferrai at us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 1:27 PM
To: Bertrand Le Roy
Cc: ide at openajax.org
Subject: RE: [OpenAjaxIDE] Bootstrapping 
  

Bertand,
Does your response mean that everything else in my email is good? I assume that the answer is no, and that your response represents only the subset of things you could think of at the moment. In any case, it would be good if you and others could respond with what parts sounded good and which ones didn't.

Thanks.
Jon


Inactive hide details for Bertrand Le Roy <Bertrand.Le.Roy at microsoft.com>Bertrand Le Roy <Bertrand.Le.Roy at microsoft.com>


Bertrand Le Roy < <mailto:Bertrand.Le.Roy at microsoft.com> Bertrand.Le.Roy at microsoft.com> 

10/23/2007 01:18 PM 

 



To


Jon Ferraiolo/Menlo Park/IBM at IBMUS, " <mailto:ide at openajax.org> ide at openajax.org" < <mailto:ide at openajax.org> ide at openajax.org> 



cc

	


Subject


RE: [OpenAjaxIDE] Bootstrapping


  

 

		


A few points: 
· I’m a little uneasy about having the name OpenAjax (or even something generic such as metadata) as the file name because if the file gets separated from the library or gets out of the folder, you can’t guess what’s in there without opening it. I’d prefer a convention that is a variation of the library’s file name. i.e. prototype.js -> prototype.metadata.xml
· We shouldn’t force people to put different libraries in different folders if they don’t want to.
· The file should be discoverable from the directory where the file sits as well as from some central directory on the file system that’s determined by the IDE itself. This enables web authors to not have the metadata file pollute the web site if they don’t want it there. 

From: ide-bounces at openajax.org [ <mailto:ide-bounces at openajax.org> mailto:ide-bounces at openajax.org] On Behalf Of Jon Ferraiolo
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 12:52 PM
To: ide at openajax.org
Subject: [OpenAjaxIDE] Bootstrapping 

(I'm only sending this to ide at openajax.org because this is mostly centered on IDE workflows, not mashup workflows, although this proposal does attempt to address some of the expected requirements from the Gadgets TF)

We have looked at various grammars (XML, JSON and JSDoc) for representing library metadata (APIs and widgets). At our last phone call, there was a sense that we would be able to take the best features from each of the proposals such that we could define a unified XML grammar that might address all of our requirements. This is all good.

My question today is how does it all get bootstrapped (i.e., discovered, loaded, initialized)? Let's assume we have an IDE and two Ajax libaries, "A" and "B". How does the IDE discover A and B, make them available to the IDE, and how does it find (or possibly auto-generate) the XML metadata files that describe the APIs and widgets?

Here is one approach that might work:

1) An Ajax library is assumed to have a root folder, and everything needed by the library descends from that root folder. It is assumed that the IDE "discovers" a given library either because the library ships with the IDE or the library can be imported into the IDE somehow (post-installation), and the key thing that the IDE needs to know is the name of the root folder for the library.

2) To bootstrap library metadata, a file named OpenAjaxLib.xml file SHOULD exist in the root folder. This file provides overall metadata about the library (e.g., version#). But note the word "SHOULD". It is OK if OpenAjaxLib.xml is separate from the library, in which case the IDE will need to collect the metadata some other way, such as prompt the user provide the location of the OpenAjaxLib.xml file.

3) API metadata and widget metadata can be scattered around the directory structure. Assume that the IDE will recursively search through directories to find those files. No need for a master manifest file, which is difficult to keep up to date. We simply have to come up with a standard filename for the metadata files, such as OpenAjaxAPI.xml and OpenAjaxWidget.xml. (Note: we might provide an optimization feature in OpenAjaxLib.xml where explicit search paths could be defined and the toolkit developer can choose different names than OpenAjaxAPI.xml and OpenAjaxWidget.xml)

4) We make sure that OpenAjaxAPI.xml can be generated dynamically by the IDE through a just-in-time transformation (e.g., transforming MS's inline XML annotations into OpenAjaxAPI.xml or transforming JSDoc inline annotations into OpenAjaxAPI.xml)

5) We attempt to define the format for OpenAjaxWidget.xml such that:
a) it can be used to serve all common definitions for "widget" (WUI=UI controls, WMASH=Mashup widgets, WDASH=Installable desktop gadgets such as Dashboard)
b) we make sure there are lossless transformations to/from selected existing WMASH and WDASH widgets formats (e.g., Apple Dashboard, Google Universal Gadgets)

6) Allow OpenAjaxWidget.xml to include API definitions that apply to the given widget. Therefore, inside of OpenAjaxWidget.xml there might be tags from OpenAjaxAPI.xml.

Relationship to the proposals from Adobe, Aptana, and MS, plus also jMaki:

a) OpenAjaxWidget.xml should be largely analogous to jMaki's widget.json file, but needs to (roughly) support the union of features from Adobe's proposals and IBM's proposal to the Gadget's TF, plus offer an extensibility approach such that a rich UI system like dijit could embrace this format down the road. (Not saying that dijit should do this, but the format should allow this as a future possibility.)

b) OpenAjaxAPI.xml should be extensible in a manner that address's MS needs for supporting other languages. (As we discussed at the last phone call.)

c) Under the extensibility veneer per (b), the description of JavaScript APIs probably should look a lot like Aptana's markup language

Bottom line, my thinking today is that we need 3 different formats, OpenAjaxLib.xml, OpenAjaxAPI.xml and OpenAjaxWidget.xml.



_______________________________________________
IDE mailing list
IDE at openajax.org
 <http://openajax.org/mailman/listinfo/ide> http://openajax.org/mailman/listinfo/ide

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://openajax.org/pipermail/ide/attachments/20071024/a964c093/attachment-0001.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.gif
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://openajax.org/pipermail/ide/attachments/20071024/a964c093/attachment-0001.gif 


More information about the IDE mailing list