Re: Call for consensus for the pagination design (ISSUE-42)

+1

I only would like to have a replacement for "itemsPerPage", maybe 
"itemsPerView".
Reason: If you are on a offset based pagination scheme, it allows to to 
calculate the
number of pages. (yes, I still call it paging on the user's end).


Am 18.10.2015 um 21:18 schrieb Markus Lanthaler:
> It looks like the latest pagination design [1] stroke the right balance and
> finally allows us to move past this contentious issue. Briefly summarized,
> the main issues of the currently specified pagination design is that the
> collection and their pages are conflated which yields to a number of
> problems in practice. This has been tracked as ISSUE-42 [2].
>
> The proposed solution for that issue is to look at pages of a collection as
> specific *views* on a single underlying collection instead of thinking of
> the collection as the sum of its pages. More concretely, the proposal is to
>   - replace PagedCollection with PartialCollectionView
>   - replace firstPage/nextPage/previousPage/lastPage with
> first/next/previous/last
>   - associate totalItems with Collection instead of PagedCollection
>   - remove itemsPerPage for the time being (we will likely re-introduce it
> with a different name)
>
> The representation of a specific view on a collection would look somewhat
> like this with the new proposed design:
>
>    {
>      "@id": "http://api.example.com/an-issue/comments",
>      "@type": "Collection",
>      "member": [ ... ],
>      "totalItems": 150,
>      "view": {
>        "@id": "/an-issue/comments?page=3",
>        "@type": "PartialCollectionView",
>        "first": "/an-issue/comments",
>        "previous": "/an-issue/comments?page=2",
>        "next": "/an-issue/comments?page=4",
>        "last": "/an-issue/comments?page=498",
>      }
>    }
>
>
> This serves as a call for consensus. Before I proceed with marking ISSUE-42
> [2] as resolved and implementing the changes in the spec, I would like to
> ask if anyone has any concerns or objections against this proposal.
>
> Please submit your comments by Saturday, October 24th.
>
>
> Thanks,
> Markus
>
>
> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-hydra/2015Oct/0121.html
> [2] https://github.com/HydraCG/Specifications/issues/42
>
>
> --
> Markus Lanthaler
> @markuslanthaler
>
>

Received on Thursday, 22 October 2015 04:42:15 UTC