New capabilities.xml format

The format of capabilities.xml has been changed. I have looked at the http://code.google.com/intl/da/apis/wave/extensions/robots/ and it is now possible to also specify the profile.

The new code looks like the following.

<w:robot xmlns:w="http://wave.google.com/extensions/robots/1.0">
<w:version>0.1</w:version>
<w:capabilities>
  <w:capability name="BLIP_SUBMITTED"/>
  <w:capability name="DOCUMENT_CHANGED"/>
</w:capabilities>
<w:profile name="Cartoony" imageurl="http://cartoonybot.appspot.com/public/avatar.png" profileurl="http://cartoonybot.appspot.com"/>
</w:robot>

This is much nicer than using the profile servlet, which served the same informations. With the help of this new XML format you can delete your profile servlet. I cannot imagine a time, where the profile image needs to change dependant of which user is calling it. I don’t think you have the informaiton in the request sendt to get the profile informaiton. So thise values will always be hardcoded.

It does not provide much of a change in Python, since python already generates the document. Then we just need the Java API also to follow the python, so it also can create the cababilites based on configuration in a class file.

Bookmark and Share

Published by

avatar

Daniel Graversen

Founder of masteringwave.com and SAP Integration consultant at figaf.com

4 thoughts on “New capabilities.xml format”

  1. “I cannot imagine a time, where the profile image needs to change dependant of which user is calling it.”

    I can. I have a problem now that I have multiple “me’s”. There’s my professional me, there’s my personal me, there’s my Flying’sCool! me, and so on. To support all that, I have to have multiple accounts, and sometimes my different me’s overlap which causes a mess on where the data should go and which me should act on it, and so on. Wouldn’t it be nice to have a single account, and show the appropriate information based on who is looking at it.

    Based on that logic, I might want a different image to show based on the user who is calling it.

  2. Yes, I’m thinking that for this to work the profile would have to support multiple levels of “security” I guess you could call it, or perhaps it could be called multiple users, perhaps each with a different tag or username or something. Then my boss would know me as thomas.performengineer or it could be linked with thomas@mycompany, my friends would know me as tom, my other business acquaintances would know me by thomas.flyingscool and so on, and each user would be associated to a different network, and I would join people to each network as appropriate. That way I could keep my personal stuff to myself and only people allowed access to my personal network would see that stuff, and so on.

    It would be nice if a single user login could access this interface. Then I could manage all the input/output for all my networks from a single interface, with I imagine some sort of filtering so I can choose to see it all or just the data for one of my users.

    Obviously there’s a lot more to it than this.

  3. But this profile image is dealing with the look of the advatar of robots.
    But you idea of having multiply profies could make sense in a business/private connection. If you from you inbox could connect to multiply accounts. Could be be a way to solve it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>