[aerogear-dev] HTML View Responder

[Lucas Holmquist]

+1

From a user perspective, i think the route sections looks clean with this approach 

On Dec 21, 2012, at 9:34 AM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi, 
> 
> I'm working on AEROGEAR-693 and trying to figure out how to implement this in the best way.
> 
> At the moment, the default type of ViewResponder is the MvcResponder which forwards to a JSP page. By default, this means that if you do not specify a produces() method on a route, this is what you'll get.
> 
> Now, the media types that are passed to the produces() method determine two things: 1. How to match to Route that is the target of a request, matching the HTTP Accept header. 2. Determining the ViewResponder to be used.
> 
> The issue here is that for both a HTMLResponder and a JSPResponder the media type would in both cases betext/html.
> How do we determine which one the users actually has created a view for (jsp or html page)?
> 
> Well, we need some way to differantiate between a route that will respond with a html view, but which uses a ceratain technique to render the html.
> 
> How about a introduce a type, MediaType that looks something like this:
> 
> public class MediaType {
> 
>     public static final String HTML = "text/html";
>     public static final String ANY = "*/*";
>     public static final String JSON = "application/json";
> 
>     private final String mediaType;
>     private final Class<? extends Responder> responderClass;
> 
>     private MediaType(final String mediaType, Class<? extends Responder> responderClass) {
>         this.mediaType = mediaType;
>         this.responderClass = responderClass;
>     }
> 
>     public String getMediaType() {
>         return mediaType;
>     }
> 
>     public Class<? extends Responder> getResponderClass() {
>         return responderClass;
>     }
> 
>     @Override
>     public String toString() {
>         return "MediaType[type=" + mediaType + ", responderClass=" + responderClass + "]";
>     }
> 
>     public static MediaType html() {
>         return new MediaType(HTML, HtmlViewResponder.class);
>     }
> 
>     public static MediaType jsp() {
>         return new MediaType(HTML, JspViewResponder.class);
>     }
> 
>     public static MediaType json() {
>         return new MediaType(JSON, JsonResponder.class);
>     }
> 
> }
> And we could add html(), jsp(), and json() methods to AbstractRoutingModule, so a route that should be handled by a HtmlViewResponder would look like this:
> 
> route()
>       .from("/plain")
>       .on(RequestMethod.GET)
>       .produces(html())
>       .to(Html.class).index();
> To be backward compatible, if a produces() method was not specified it would be the same as specifying:
> 
>       .produces(json())
> _______________________________________________
> aerogear-dev mailing list
> aerogear-dev at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/aerogear-dev/attachments/20121221/3964ba4b/attachment-0001.html