On Jan 11, 2013, at 7:54 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@apache.org> wrote:

On Fri, Jan 11, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew@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)

http://search.twitter.com/search.json?q=aerogear


-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@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@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@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@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev


_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev



_______________________________________________
aerogear-dev mailing list
aerogear-dev@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@lists.jboss.org
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev