[OpenAjaxIDE] [OpenAjaxGadgets] Widget constructors - property bag *not* passed

Howard Weingram weingram at tibco.com
Thu Aug 14 21:16:11 PDT 2008

Okay. Make it a Gadgets call.


	From: Jon Ferraiolo [mailto:jferrai at us.ibm.com] 
	Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2008 10:53 AM
	To: Howard Weingram
	Cc: gadgets at openajax.org; ide at openajax.org
	Subject: RE: [OpenAjaxGadgets] Widget constructors - property
bag *not* passed

	Hi Howard,
	So we can hammer through this issue, are you available for the
IDE phone call next Tuesday (1pm PT) or a Gadgets phone call next
Wednesday (also 1pm PT)?
	Stew is out this week, but I assume he will be available next
	 "Howard Weingram" <weingram at tibco.com>

				"Howard Weingram" <weingram at tibco.com> 

				08/13/2008 05:06 PM



Jon Ferraiolo/Menlo Park/IBM at IBMUS, <ide at openajax.org>,
<gadgets at openajax.org>	




RE: [OpenAjaxGadgets] Widget constructors - property bag *not* passed	

	I am not sure about this, Jon.
	The property bag being passed in could include properties
	(such as local security callbacks) that are not intended for 
	external advertisement.
	Could we please leave this in here for now? Thanks.

	From: gadgets-bounces at openajax.org [
mailto:gadgets-bounces at openajax.org] On Behalf Of Jon Ferraiolo
	Sent: Wednesday, August 13, 2008 1:07 PM
	To: ide at openajax.org; gadgets at openajax.org
	Subject: [OpenAjaxGadgets] Widget constructors - property bag
*not* passed

	As we worked on the reference implementation, we discovered that
there was no need to pass a property bag to the widget constructor, as
we have talked about in the past. The widget can simply call
widgetwrapper.getPropertyValue() for any property values that it needs,
and can make the call to getPropertyValue() at the time when the widget
needs the information. Another approach to getting property values is to
take advantage of the @@foo@@ macro substitution feature by including
something like <javascript>var
	In our reference implementation, we maintain copies of property
values on both sides (i.e., one copy in the mashup editor and one copy
in the widget itself), so when a widget calls getPropertyValue(), there
is negligible performance impact. It seems likely that other
implementations would use a similar approach.
	Does anyone see any problems with removing the preliminary
section in the spec (i.e., still has red-colored comments) that talks
about passing the property bag to the widget constructor? To me, this is
a vestigial section that no longer makes sense. Here is the section of
the spec that I propose to remove:
	If no one objects by the end of the week, I'll remove this


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://openajax.org/pipermail/ide/attachments/20080814/bdad59a2/attachment.html 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 105 bytes
Desc: graycol.gif
Url : http://openajax.org/pipermail/ide/attachments/20080814/bdad59a2/attachment.gif 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 45 bytes
Desc: ecblank.gif
Url : http://openajax.org/pipermail/ide/attachments/20080814/bdad59a2/attachment-0001.gif 

More information about the IDE mailing list