rave-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Geer <ch...@cxtsoftware.com>
Subject Re: XML vs JSON
Date Thu, 11 Jul 2013 20:49:11 GMT
Sorry, no go-backs.

J/K, see my response in your other thread.


On Thu, Jul 11, 2013 at 1:23 PM, Erin Noe-Payne <erin.noe.payne@gmail.com>wrote:

> Chris, after thinking about this more carefully, I believe that any
> list endpoint should return a full representation of the object.
> Endpoints should support a ?fields query string parameter to allow
> partial representation as needed. I've outlined this in my recent
> proposal for the rest api interface - we can continue discussion
> there.
>
> On Mon, Jul 8, 2013 at 11:57 AM, Erin Noe-Payne
> <erin.noe.payne@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Correct.
> >
> > On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Chris Geer <chris@cxtsoftware.com>
> wrote:
> >> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 2:21 PM, Erin Noe-Payne <
> erin.noe.payne@gmail.com>wrote:
> >>
> >>> For individual resources angular will expect json objects, for any
> >>> query or list results, angular would expect an array of objects. It
> >>> does not necessarily care if those objects are partial representations
> >>> - that's more about our architecture and balancing # of requests on a
> >>> page vs weight of data we deliver. Does that answer your question?
> >>>
> >>
> >> Just to make sure, for example, if you requested a .../people/ and got
> >>
> >> [{ "id": 1, "name": "Bob"}, { "id": 2, "name": "Sue"}]
> >>
> >> but when you requested ../people/1 you got
> >>
> >> { "id": 1, "name": "Bob", "email": "bob@bob.com"...}
> >>
> >> it would be ok. i.e the full object at /people/1 doesn't match the
> object
> >> in the list at /people/
> >>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Jul 7, 2013 at 4:36 PM, Chris Geer <chris@cxtsoftware.com>
> wrote:
> >>> > Sorry to bring this topic back up but I wanted to make sure the
> JSONView
> >>> > approach will work with the Angular branch. Erin, when angular hits
> the
> >>> web
> >>> > service, does it expect the GET on the resource list to return the
> full
> >>> > objects? Or can it get the full objects individually? The idea is
> that
> >>> the
> >>> > list would return a subset of the data (i.e. no need to return every
> >>> detail
> >>> > about every person when you just want a list of people).
> >>> >
> >>> > Chris
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Thu, Jun 13, 2013 at 7:21 AM, Matt Franklin <
> m.ben.franklin@gmail.com
> >>> >wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 5:31 PM, Erin Noe-Payne <
> >>> erin.noe.payne@gmail.com
> >>> >> >wrote:
> >>> >>
> >>> >> > I believe we are only interested in JSON.
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>> >> JSON is critical.  XML would be nice to have if we can do it though.
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> >
> >>> >> > On Wed, Jun 12, 2013 at 4:58 PM, Chris Geer <
> chris@cxtsoftware.com>
> >>> >> wrote:
> >>> >> > > All, I've been working on the web services and something
that I
> >>> think
> >>> >> we
> >>> >> > > need to implement is being able to return reduced data
sets. For
> >>> >> example,
> >>> >> > > if you get a list of people it should contain some less
> information
> >>> for
> >>> >> > > each person than if you got a single person. There is
a really
> easy
> >>> way
> >>> >> > to
> >>> >> > > handle this in JSON using the @JSONView annotation from
Jackson.
> >>> It's a
> >>> >> > > little tricker with XML but do-able as well.
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > I'm of the opinion that we could get away with only returning
> JSON
> >>> but
> >>> >> > what
> >>> >> > > does everyone else think?
> >>> >> > >
> >>> >> > > Chris
> >>> >> >
> >>> >>
> >>>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message