On Jan 11, 2013, at 7:54 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org> wrote:
On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Matthias Wessendorf
<matzew(a)apache.org> wrote:
> on my pagingContext, the next() would figure out how to use it for scrolling.
>
> I don't mind the headers, actually I like it.
I *think* adding the meta data into the response would be wrong (cross
cutting concerns)
-M
>
> ```
> Link-Previous: cars?page=0&page=4
> Link-First: cars?page=0&page=4
> MetaData-PerPage: 4
> MetaData-Page: 0
> Link-Next: cars?page=1&page=4
>
>
> Do you think we "need" a "Link-Last"? (like github does)?
>
> -M
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 1:48 PM, Daniel Bevenius
> <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>> Just to mention it, the Header are on option, we could still return the
>> metedata an links in the json. Perhaps with an extra query param to enable
>> this addition. But I understand that we need to be able to handle headers
>> also if that is what users choose.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 11 January 2013 13:46, Kris Borchers <kris(a)redhat.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> There were some discussions a long time ago but I don't remember ever
>>> coming to a conclusion on how paging should be implemented and I don't
know
>>> any links to gists off the top of my head.
>>>
>>> That being said, this and the Paging Demo thread have gotten me thinking
>>> that though I thought JS was ready, I see it is not. I had not thought about
>>> the metadata being in headers. Since we are abstracting away the HTTP
>>> request, it may make it harder to get at that information without us
>>> providing an API into it (well, maybe not for JS but it might be nice to
>>> have a built in way to access that info).
>>>
>>> I think this deserves a more in-depth conversation than can happen in
>>> e-mail. Anyone up for a hangout ASAP to iron out what we want for the client
>>> APIs? This looks like it could get messy when trying to keep it flexible for
>>> the developer, though, this does make a great case/example for how useful my
>>> ideas for automatic client configuration come in. :)
>>>
>>> On Jan 11, 2013, at 5:39 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> was there already some discussion (and proposal) for paging APIs on the
>>>> client ?
>>>>
>>>> It would be nice if the public client API semantics are somewhat
>>>> identical on the different platforms.
>>>> (I guess it's a MUST :))
>>>>
>>>> Any pointers to gists etc are welcome
>>>>
>>>> Thx
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> 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
--
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