Hi, we've created the following gist[1] to specify our requirements for pagination. We can discuss this on the mailing list and then update the doc as we go along. This will later be turned into a page under the spec section of the site. Nothing has been decide yet even if it might read like it has in the document. [1] https://gist.github.com/4537431 _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Douglas Campos <qmx(a)qmx.me&gt; wrote: > standards++ Looks like we agreed on using the RFC 5988 for the linking. I think we "just" need to decide on the actual values... 1) the standard uses "previous" and "next"

Hey, there was some talk yesterday on IRC about what should be returned by AeroGear Controller if you go beyond past the last page. There was talk of responding with "204 No Content" with an empty body, or responde with "200 OK" and a body containing an empty array (in the case of returning a JSON responds). I've update the controller-demo with the "200 OK" version, but let me know if this should be changed. "Paging" beyond the last page of Cars curl -i --header "Accept: application/json" "http://controllerdemo-danbev.rhcloud.com/aerogear-controller-demo/cars?offset=200&limit=5" HTTP/1.1 200 OKAG-Total: 16AG-Links-First: cars?offset=0&limit=5AG-Links-Last: cars?offset=11&limit=5Content-Type: application/json;charset=UTF-8Content-Length: 2 [] gist: https://gist.github.com/4500336 On 17 January 2013 17:39, Douglas Campos <qmx(a)qmx.me&gt; wrote: > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 05:10:56PM +0100, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Douglas Campos <qmx(a)qmx.me&gt; wrote: > > > standards++ > > > > Looks like we agreed on using the RFC 5988 for the linking. > > > > I think we "just" need to decide on the actual values... > > > > 1) the standard uses "previous" and "next" > no-brainer - let's follow the standards > > -- qmx :) > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

>But I guess we (at least on the client) are ignoring the FIRST/LAST, right ? So should we only provide previous/next where it makes sense and remove first/last?

On 18 January 2013 15:57, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: NICE !!! But I guess we (at least on the client) are ignoring the FIRST/LAST, right ? :) -M On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: Hey, there was some talk yesterday on IRC about what should be returned by AeroGear Controller if you go beyond past the last page. There was talk of responding with "204 No Content" with an empty body, or responde with "200 OK" and a body containing an empty array (in the case of returning a JSON responds). I've update the controller-demo with the "200 OK" version, but let me know if this should be changed. "Paging" beyond the last page of Cars curl -i --header "Accept: application/json" "http://controllerdemo-danbev.rhcloud.com/aerogear-controller-demo/cars?offset=200&limit=5" HTTP/1.1 200 OK AG-Total: 16 AG-Links-First: cars?offset=0&limit=5 AG-Links-Last: cars?offset=11&limit=5 Content-Type: application/json;charset=UTF-8 Content-Length: 2 [] gist: https://gist.github.com/4500336 On 17 January 2013 17:39, Douglas Campos <qmx(a)qmx.me&gt; wrote: On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 05:10:56PM +0100, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Douglas Campos <qmx(a)qmx.me&gt; wrote: > > standards++ > > Looks like we agreed on using the RFC 5988 for the linking. > > I think we "just" need to decide on the actual values... > > 1) the standard uses "previous" and "next" no-brainer - let's follow the standards -- qmx :) _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Kris Borchers <kris(a)redhat.com&gt; wrote: > > > On Jan 18, 2013, at 9:03 AM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > >But I guess we (at least on the client) are ignoring the FIRST/LAST, right ? > So should we only provide previous/next where it makes sense and remove first/last? > > > +1 +1 > > > > > > > On 18 January 2013 15:57, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: >> >> NICE !!! >> >> But I guess we (at least on the client) are ignoring the FIRST/LAST, right ? >> >> :) >> >> -M >> >> On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 3:55 PM, Daniel Bevenius < daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >>> >>> Hey, >>> >>> there was some talk yesterday on IRC about what should be returned by AeroGear Controller if you go beyond past the last page. There was talk of responding with "204 No Content" with an empty body, or responde with "200 OK" and a body containing an empty array (in the case of returning a JSON responds). >>> >>> I've update the controller-demo with the "200 OK" version, but let me know if this should be changed. >>> >>> "Paging" beyond the last page of Cars >>> >>> curl -i --header "Accept: application/json" " http://controllerdemo-danbev.rhcloud.com/aerogear-controller-demo/cars?of... " >>> >>> HTTP/1.1 200 OK >>> AG-Total: 16 >>> AG-Links-First: cars?offset=0&limit=5 >>> AG-Links-Last: cars?offset=11&limit=5 >>> Content-Type: application/json;charset=UTF-8 >>> Content-Length: 2 >>> >>> [] >>> >>> >>> >>> gist: https://gist.github.com/4500336 >>> >>> >>> On 17 January 2013 17:39, Douglas Campos <qmx(a)qmx.me&gt; wrote: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 05:10:56PM +0100, Matthias Wessendorf wrote: >>>> > On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 11:55 AM, Douglas Campos <qmx(a)qmx.me&gt; wrote: >>>> > > standards++ >>>> > >>>> > Looks like we agreed on using the RFC 5988 for the linking. >>>> > >>>> > I think we "just" need to decide on the actual values... >>>> > >>>> > 1) the standard uses "previous" and "next" >>>> no-brainer - let's follow the standards >>>> >>>> -- qmx :) >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

This looks pretty good to me. On Jan 15, 2013, at 3:26 AM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com (mailto:daniel.bevenius@gmail.com)> wrote: > Hi, > > we've created the following gist[1] to specify our requirements for pagination. We can discuss this on the mailing list and then update the doc as we go along. This will later be turned into a page under the spec section of the site. > > Nothing has been decide yet even if it might read like it has in the document. > > [1] https://gist.github.com/4537431 > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org) > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org (mailto:aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org) https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

+1 On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt;wrote: > +1 Any additions? > > I just wondering about include it at > http://aerogear.org/docs/specs/aerogear-rest-api/. Makes sense? > > > -- > "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato > - > @abstractj > - > Volenti Nihil Difficile > > On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Kris Borchers wrote: > > This looks pretty good to me. > > On Jan 15, 2013, at 3:26 AM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; > wrote: > > Hi, > > we've created the following gist[1] to specify our requirements for > pagination. We can discuss this on the mailing list and then update the doc > as we go along. This will later be turned into a page under the spec > section of the site. > > Nothing has been decide yet even if it might read like it has in the > document. > > [1] https://gist.github.com/4537431 > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

I've been reading the client API spec and noticed that I completely forgot the parameter 'metadataLocation' that an endpoint could optionally accept, which indicates if the information related to paging should be returned as part of the data, or as HTTP Headers. I'll update the server side spec if no one objects.

I also wanted to bring up that in the spec at the moment we have specified that we are only returning the 'total', and not the 'offset' and 'limit'. The reason for this being that the client sent the 'offset' and 'limit' and therefore already has this information. Does anyone have a different take on this?

thanks, /Dan On 15 January 2013 19:44, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > +1 I'll start adding it tomorrow and keep it updated if no one objects. > > > On 15 January 2013 19:42, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: >> >> +1 >> >> >> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; >> wrote: >>> >>> +1 Any additions? >>> >>> I just wondering about include it at >>> http://aerogear.org/docs/specs/aerogear-rest-api/. Makes sense? >>> >>> >>> -- >>> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato >>> - >>> @abstractj >>> - >>> Volenti Nihil Difficile >>> >>> On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Kris Borchers wrote: >>> >>> This looks pretty good to me. >>> >>> On Jan 15, 2013, at 3:26 AM, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> we've created the following gist[1] to specify our requirements for >>> pagination. We can discuss this on the mailing list and then update the doc >>> as we go along. This will later be turned into a page under the spec section >>> of the site. >>> >>> Nothing has been decide yet even if it might read like it has in the >>> document. >>> >>> [1] https://gist.github.com/4537431 >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

>perhaps I don't get it - but... our backend uses the headers for the web > linking, AG-Limit etc, right? Yeah, you are correct our backend is using headers for web linking and total. We discussed [1] in the past the option to have the same information in the body of the response instead of as HTTP headers, for example an Object in a JSON response. The location of this information could then be specified by the client to tell the server where it should place the metadata.

>I think, it's OK to NOT send that limit/offset overhead to someone >that knows about it already. That's what you are saying, right ? Yep, so we would just return the 'AG-Total' in this case.

[1] http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-Paging-Demo-td1173... On 17 January 2013 08:36, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Daniel Bevenius > <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > > I've been reading the client API spec and noticed that I completely > > forgot > > the parameter 'metadataLocation' that an endpoint could optionally > > accept, > > which indicates if the information related to paging should be returned > > as > > part of the data, or as HTTP Headers. > > I'll update the server side spec if no one objects. > > perhaps I don't get it - but... our backend uses the headers for the > web linking, AG-Limit etc, right? > > So why should we include a "location" header? I understood it more as > a "generic" client feature: > - Tell the pipe where (haha :-)) to look (page/content VS header) for > the "next", "previous" etc information > > > > I also wanted to bring up that in the spec at the moment we have > > specified > > that we are only returning the 'total', and not the 'offset' and > > 'limit'. > > The reason for this being that the client sent the 'offset' and 'limit' > > and > > therefore already has this information. Does anyone have a different > > take on > > this? > > I think, it's OK to NOT send that limit/offset overhead to someone > that knows about it already. That's what you are saying, right ? > > -M > > > > > thanks, > > > > /Dan > > > > > > > > > > On 15 January 2013 19:44, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; > > wrote: > >> > >> +1 I'll start adding it tomorrow and keep it updated if no one objects. > >> > >> > >> On 15 January 2013 19:42, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > >>> > >>> +1 > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Bruno Oliveira <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; > >>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> +1 Any additions? > >>>> > >>>> I just wondering about include it at > >>>> http://aerogear.org/docs/specs/aerogear-rest-api/. Makes sense? > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato > >>>> - > >>>> @abstractj > >>>> - > >>>> Volenti Nihil Difficile > >>>> > >>>> On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Kris Borchers wrote: > >>>> > >>>> This looks pretty good to me. > >>>> > >>>> On Jan 15, 2013, at 3:26 AM, Daniel Bevenius > >>>> <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; > >>>> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> we've created the following gist[1] to specify our requirements for > >>>> pagination. We can discuss this on the mailing list and then update > >>>> the doc > >>>> as we go along. This will later be turned into a page under the spec > >>>> section > >>>> of the site. > >>>> > >>>> Nothing has been decide yet even if it might read like it has in the > >>>> document. > >>>> > >>>> [1] https://gist.github.com/4537431 > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list > >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list > >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list > >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> aerogear-dev mailing list > >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > >>> > >> > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

>hrm... not sure I like that. This could wait for a later release. I am > (personally) fine in supporting just one location (and our clients should > default to it). I'm cool with that and like I said, this has not been included in the server side spec yet.

If we decide to wait until a later release we should remove this from the client api spec.

On 17 January 2013 08:56, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:47 AM, Daniel Bevenius > <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > >>perhaps I don't get it - but... our backend uses the headers for the web > >> linking, AG-Limit etc, right? > > Yeah, you are correct our backend is using headers for web linking and > > total. We discussed [1] in the past the option to have the same > > information > > in the body of the response instead of as HTTP headers, for example an > > Object in a JSON response. The location of this information could then > > be > > specified by the client to tell the server where it should place the > > metadata. > > > hrm... not sure I like that. This could wait for a later release. I am > (personally) fine > in supporting just one location (and our clients should default to it). > > >>I think, it's OK to NOT send that limit/offset overhead to someone > >>that knows about it already. That's what you are saying, right ? > > Yep, so we would just return the 'AG-Total' in this case. > > great :) > > > > > [1] > > > > http://aerogear-dev.1069024.n5.nabble.com/aerogear-dev-Paging-Demo-td1173... > > > > > > On 17 January 2013 08:36, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: > >> > >> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 8:05 AM, Daniel Bevenius > >> <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > >> > I've been reading the client API spec and noticed that I completely > >> > forgot > >> > the parameter 'metadataLocation' that an endpoint could optionally > >> > accept, > >> > which indicates if the information related to paging should be > >> > returned > >> > as > >> > part of the data, or as HTTP Headers. > >> > I'll update the server side spec if no one objects. > >> > >> perhaps I don't get it - but... our backend uses the headers for the > >> web linking, AG-Limit etc, right? > >> > >> So why should we include a "location" header? I understood it more as > >> a "generic" client feature: > >> - Tell the pipe where (haha :-)) to look (page/content VS header) for > >> the "next", "previous" etc information > >> > >> > >> > I also wanted to bring up that in the spec at the moment we have > >> > specified > >> > that we are only returning the 'total', and not the 'offset' and > >> > 'limit'. > >> > The reason for this being that the client sent the 'offset' and > >> > 'limit' > >> > and > >> > therefore already has this information. Does anyone have a different > >> > take on > >> > this? > >> > >> I think, it's OK to NOT send that limit/offset overhead to someone > >> that knows about it already. That's what you are saying, right ? > >> > >> -M > >> > >> > > >> > thanks, > >> > > >> > /Dan > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > On 15 January 2013 19:44, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; > >> > wrote: > >> >> > >> >> +1 I'll start adding it tomorrow and keep it updated if no one > >> >> objects. > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> On 15 January 2013 19:42, Sebastien Blanc <scm.blanc(a)gmail.com&gt; > >> >> wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>> +1 > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> On Tue, Jan 15, 2013 at 7:37 PM, Bruno Oliveira > >> >>> <bruno(a)abstractj.org&gt; > >> >>> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> +1 Any additions? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> I just wondering about include it at > >> >>>> http://aerogear.org/docs/specs/aerogear-rest-api/. Makes sense? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> -- > >> >>>> "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato > >> >>>> - > >> >>>> @abstractj > >> >>>> - > >> >>>> Volenti Nihil Difficile > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Tuesday, January 15, 2013 at 11:18 AM, Kris Borchers wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> This looks pretty good to me. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> On Jan 15, 2013, at 3:26 AM, Daniel Bevenius > >> >>>> <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; > >> >>>> wrote: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Hi, > >> >>>> > >> >>>> we've created the following gist[1] to specify our requirements > >> >>>> for > >> >>>> pagination. We can discuss this on the mailing list and then > >> >>>> update > >> >>>> the doc > >> >>>> as we go along. This will later be turned into a page under the > >> >>>> spec > >> >>>> section > >> >>>> of the site. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Nothing has been decide yet even if it might read like it has in > >> >>>> the > >> >>>> document. > >> >>>> > >> >>>> [1] https://gist.github.com/4537431 > >> >>>> _______________________________________________ > >> >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list > >> >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> _______________________________________________ > >> >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list > >> >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> _______________________________________________ > >> >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list > >> >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> _______________________________________________ > >> >>> aerogear-dev mailing list > >> >>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > >> >>> > >> >> > >> > > >> > > >> > _______________________________________________ > >> > aerogear-dev mailing list > >> > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Matthias Wessendorf > >> > >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > >> _______________________________________________ > >> aerogear-dev mailing list > >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > aerogear-dev mailing list > > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > > > > > > -- > Matthias Wessendorf > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf > twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev _______________________________________________ aerogear-dev mailing list aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev

>I think, it's OK to NOT send that limit/offset overhead to someone >that knows about it already. That's what you are saying, right ? Yep, so we would just return the 'AG-Total' in this case.

>I'm still worried about having something explicit for the number of records available It would have to be optional I think as we can't really know if the backend has this support or even wants to support this if there are large amounts of records. Is this your concern?