I've used _docStore.Conventions.IdentityPartsSeparator = "-"; for the normal document ids, for using it in mvc but when I use revision document Ids. I get the id with "/". Is there a way to customize the revision ids too?
No, because the conventions are only client side conventions. The RavenDB server has no way to know that you have changed your conventions. The versioning bundle operates from a server-side trigger.
Related
I have an web API application that will serve many clients at different times of release and now i need to implement a versioning. Because the API code will be constantly updated and API users will not be able to instantly change their API. Well, the standard situation is when you need to introduce versioning in general. I'm finding a way to organize it inside my API. It's clear that it will not be different folders with an application on the server, conditionally called app_v1, app_v2, app_v2.1, etc., cause this is duplication, redundancy and bad practise.
It's look like will be one application, and in the controllers at the code level there will be a division of the logic already, like If(client_version==1) do function1() else if(client_version==2) do function2(), etc. It seems that git supports tags, this is something similar to versioning, but because all supported versions of the application need be on the server at the same time, this is not about that. how i can realize an architecture in this case?
There are many well-known ways to use API versioning to make code work with older versions. (backward compatibility). The general purpose of API versioning is a way to make sure that different clients can use different versions of an API at the same time. I've seen several ways to do API versioning, such as:
URL Path Versioning: In this method, the number of the version is part of the API endpoint's URL path. For instance:
https://api.example.com/v1/assets
https://api.example.com/v2/assets
URL Query String Parameter: In this method, the version number is added to the API endpoint's URL as a query string parameter. For instance:
https://api.example.com/assets?version=1
https://api.example.com/assets?version=2
HTTP Header: In this method, the version number is put in an HTTP header, like the Accept-Version header. For instance:
Accept-Version: 1
Accept-Version: 2
If you are using dotnet for you project I would like recommend to standard library for that recommend to check this out. Or you can find solid materials in term of WebApi Versioning following link by #Steve Smith.
There is another answer.
I wonder how to make some fields of an entity extension searchable in the administration through the "/api/search/my-entity" api-endpoint. By default they are not considered during search as it looks like.
I found the answer by debugging the search-endpoint:
The association-Field of the EntityExtension needs to have a SearchRanking-flag:
...->addFlags(new SearchRanking(SearchRanking::ASSOCIATION_SEARCH_RANKING))
Then you can add SearchRanking-flags in the EntityExtensionDefinition as you like, e.g.:
(new StringField('test', 'test'))->addFlags(new SearchRanking(SearchRanking::HIGH_SEARCH_RANKING)),
After that the fields are searchable via the search-endpoint :)
As far as the API is concerned, search functionality should automatically be generated following your custom entity definitions.
When it comes to facilitate Admin search for your entity, you need to add some code to the administration component as described in the docs: https://developer.shopware.com/docs/guides/plugins/plugins/administration/search-custom-data (even though it looks not fully up-to-date w.r.t to the current Shopware versions).
I am building a Javascript Web application with a Domino back end, using the Domino DDS REST api to do POST, PUT, and GET operations against the database. I want to use Authors and Readers fields in documents to control which users can see which documents and to give users with Author access in the ACL the ability to edit documents they have created. When doing a POST of a new document (implemented by the save() method of a new Backbone model) is there a way to designate one or more fields as Readers or Authors?
Doing a GET on an existing document returns a JSON object with an attribute named '#authors' containing the names and roles in the Authors fields. Is this attribute read/write?
Can I populate #authors with the desired values before doing a POST to have these values control author access?
My colleague says the Domino REST api makes no provision for setting Authors and Readers fields, and that this functionality can only be done through Java servlets. Is this right?
I'm not familiar with the Domino DDS REST API, but from what I gather it is doubtfull that when POSTing a document, you get to chose the type of the fields. I suspect they all end up as text.
What you could do however is to link the action of your form to a Domino agent which, using the backend Java or LotusScript API, will be able to control precisely the final shape of your document, hereby allowing you to fully utilize the powerfull security model of Domino.
Nevertheless, keep in mind that at some point, your users will have to authenticate against the Domino Directory. Depending where your users originally log in, you may need to talk to your Domino administrator to sort out a Single Sing-On scheme linked to your other directory.
Alternatively, you could take advantage of the fact that Domino is also a web server and an application server : you can build your HTML form in there, starting with a Domino form (simple) or an xPage (a bit more complex).
You may want to have a look here.
Some would say that you could even build your whole application in Domino, as using it as a mere back-end data repository is akin to using a Rolls-Royce to ferry potatoes, but I suppose that you and your organization have good reasons to do so.
Finally you could also completely ditch Domino and use another nosql database like MongoDB, but that would only displace your access control problem.
You can post data back to Domino and nominate a form to use. If you use the 'computewithform=true' parameter and the form design includes the authors/reader fields you need, this will set the field flags correctly and automatically.
I'm designing a restful API using the ASP.NET MVC Web API stack. I am allowing users to create/update/delete records using the relevant HTTP verb. I accept both XML and JSON content types. I'm currently designing the put (update) method on my first endpoint and ran into a question:
I'm wondering what the best practices are for null/empty fields when updating via an API. Should a null/empty field indicate that the consumer is ignoring the field and does not want it updated or that the field which may or may not have previously had a value, should not currently have a value?
Specifically, when a field has data and an update is sent with null/empty data should this field be a) ignored the b) updated and nulled in the DB
I assume that this is something that comes up a lot, but I haven't been able to find any substantive information (mainly due to the lack of an appropriate search term)
The verb PATCH has been created for partial update.
I would use PUT for full update and PATCH for partial ones. If I remember correctly, support for PATCH is in ASP.NET Web API RC.
I am working on a content platform that should provide semantic features such as querying with SPARQL and providing rdf documents for the contained content.
I would be very thankful for some
clarification on the following
questions:
Did I get that right, that an entity
hub can connect several semantic
stores to a single point of access?
And if not, what is the difference
between a semantic store and an
entity hub?
What frameworks would you use to
store content documents as well as
their semantic annotation?
It is important for the solution to be able to later on retrieve the document (html page / docs such as pdf, doc,...) and their annotated version.
Thanks in advance,
Chris
The only Entityhub term that I know is belong to Apache Stanbol project. And here is a paragraph from the original documentation explaining what Entityhub does:
The Entityhub provides two main services. The Entityhub provides the
connection to external linked open data sites as well as using indexes
of them locally. Its services allow to manage a network of sites to
consume entity information and to manage entities locally.
Entityhub documentation:
http://incubator.apache.org/stanbol/docs/trunk/entityhub.html
Enhancer component of Apache Stanbol provides extracting external entities related with the submitted content using the linked open data sites managed by Entityhub. These enhancements of contents are formed as RDF data. Then, it is also possible to store those content items in Apache Stanbol and run SPARQL queries on top of RDF enhancements. Contenthub component of Apache Stanbol also provides faceted search functionality over the submitted content items.
Documentation of Apache Stanbol:
http://incubator.apache.org/stanbol/docs/trunk/
Access to running demos:
http://dev.iks-project.eu/
You can also ask your further questions to stanbol-dev AT incubator.apache.org.
Alternative suggestion...
Drupal 7 has in-built RDFa support for annotation and is more of a general purpose CMS than Semantic MediaWiki
In more detail...
I'm not really sure what you mean by entity hub, where are you getting that definition from or what do you mean by it?
Yes one can easily write a system that connects to multiple semantic stores, given the context of your question I assume you are referring to RDF Triple Stores?
Any decent CMS should be assigning documents some form of unique/persistent ID to documents so even if the system you go with does not support semantic annotation natively you could build your own extension for this. The extension would simply store annotations against the documents ID in whatever storage layer you chose (I'd assume a Triple Store would be appropriate) and then you can build appropriate query and presentation layers for querying and viewing this data as required.
http://semantic-mediawiki.org/wiki/Semantic_MediaWiki
Apache Stanbol
Do you want to implement a traditional CMS extended with some Semantic capabilities, or do you want to build a Semantic CMS? It could look the same, but actually both a two completely opposite approaches.
It is important for the solution to be able to later on retrieve the document (html page / docs such as pdf, doc,...) and their annotated version.
You can integrate Apache Stanbol with a JCR/CMIS compliant CMS like Alfresco. To get custom annotations, I suggest creating your own custom enhancement engine (maven archetype) based on your domain and adding it to the enhancement engine chain.
https://stanbol.apache.org/docs/trunk/components/enhancer/
One this is done, you can use the REST API endpoints provided by Stanbol to retrieve the results in RDF/Turtle format.