CONSOLIDATING AND REUSING PORTAL INFORMATION

• US 20150121335A1
• Filed: 10/31/2013
• Published: 04/30/2015
• Est. Priority Date: 10/31/2013
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Kyndryl Incorporated
• Original Assignee: International Business Machines Corporation
• Inventors: BRAUN, Stanley J., DEFELICE, Donald P., ERNSTBERGER, Mark R., HEARN, Susan A., LOVING, Linwood E., MCLAUGHLIN, Martin G., MEWSE, Lindsey M., MULLER, Donald P., YOUNG, James S. K.
• Granted Patent: US 9,311,062 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 717/106
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 40/143 Markup, e.g. Standard Generalized Markup Language [SGML] or Document Type Definition [DTD]
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/36 Software reuse
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 8/38 for implementing user interfaces

Abstract

An approach for consolidating and reusing portal information within different web applications. The approach includes a method that includes retrieving, by at least one computing device, code from an application. The method includes deconstructing, by the at least one computing device, the code into code fragments. The method includes validating, by the at least one computing device, each of the code fragments. The method includes matching, by the at least one computing device, each of the code fragments with server-side components. The method includes generating, by the at least one computing device, a portlet based on the matching.

Claims

1. A method comprising:

retrieving, by at least one computing device, code from an application;

deconstructing, by the at least one computing device, the code into code fragments;

validating, by the at least one computing device, each of the code fragments;

matching, by the at least one computing device, each of the code fragments with server-side components; and

generating, by the at least one computing device, a portlet based on the matching.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the validating of each of the code fragments comprises determining whether each of the code fragments can function by itself.

3. The method of claim 1, wherein the retrieving of the code occurs automatically at predetermined times.

4. The method of claim 1, further comprising combining the portlet with another portlet to generate a different function.

5. The method of claim 1, wherein the matching includes analyzing at least one of:

a common key word, a tag, and metadata.

6. The method of claim 1, wherein the retrieving occurs at a user interface (UI) layer.

7. The method of claim 1, further comprising:

receiving a request for the portlet; and

sending the portlet to another application, which is a web application.

8. The method of claim 1, wherein the generating the portlet includes combining hypertext markup language (HTML) and Javascript code fragments.

9. The method of claim 1, wherein the portlet is flagged as either common matched, transitioned matched, or unmatched.

10. The method of claim 1, wherein at least one of the code fragments is isolated and used to generate the portlet.

11. The method of claim 1, wherein the retrieving of the code is associated with a portion of a web application.

12. The method of claim 1, wherein the validating is done by using a string and receiving a value that indicates that at least one of the code fragments is valid.

13. A computer program product for generating portlets, the computer program product comprising a computer readable storage medium having program code embodied in the storage medium, the program code readable/executable by a computing device to:

receive code;

deconstruct the code into code fragments;

validate the code fragments to determine that the code fragments can function alone;

match each of the code fragments with server-side functions, wherein the matching includes analyzing at least one of;

a key word, a tag, and metadata; and

generate a portlet based on the matching.

14. The computer program product of claim 13, wherein:

the code is associated with a web application and a type of the code is at least one of;

hypertext markup language (HTML), extensible HTML (XHTML), and Javaserver Page Standard Tag Library (JSTL).

15. The computer program product of claim 13, further comprising discarding the code fragments that match the server-side functions associated with other portlets.

16. The computer program product of claim 13, further comprising testing the portlet before the portlet is used in a web application.

17. The computer program product of claim 13, wherein the validating includes inputting a dummy variable to determine that a code fragment outputs a correct value based on the dummy variable.

18. The computer program product of claim 13, further comprising receiving a request for the portlet, wherein the portlet is combined with another portlet and used in a web application.

19. The computer program product of claim 13, wherein the retrieving occurs at a user interface (UI) layer.

20. A system comprising:

a CPU, a computer readable memory and a computer readable storage medium;

program instructions to retrieve code from a web application;

program instructions to deconstruct the code into code fragments, wherein each of the code fragments is associated with at least one of;

hypertext markup language (HTML) and JavaScript;

program instructions to validate that each of the code fragments can function without requiring functionality of other code fragments;

program instructions to match each of the code fragments with server-side components,

wherein the server-side components are at least one of;

common matched components, transitioned components, and unmatched components;

program instructions to discard the code fragments associated with stored portlets;

program instructions to store the code fragments that are not associated with the stored portlets; and

program instructions to generate a portlet and use the portlet in another web application,

wherein the program instructions are stored on the computer readable storage medium for execution by the CPU via the computer readable memory.