-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 890
Profile extensions #957
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Closed
Closed
Profile extensions #957
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
23 commits
Select commit
Hold shift + click to select a range
b09bc3d
Error object: add `type` link
ethanresnick ad623ef
Content Negotiation: update rules to account for `profile` parameter
ethanresnick 3de79bf
Content negotiation: explain what a media type parameter is
ethanresnick dcf70a5
Query parameters: clean up
ethanresnick b09d759
Add the concept of "mappings"
ethanresnick c023bb1
Remove `code` member from error objects
ethanresnick 348aa8d
Add anchor to the definition of a single link
ethanresnick 715060e
Cleanup `code` formatting
ethanresnick c2ae234
Error object: clarify pointer member
ethanresnick ae1ac9b
Error objects: specify `missing` member
ethanresnick 9b8235d
Add profile extension rules!
ethanresnick 6cf30a9
Deprecate the old extension system
ethanresnick 624b138
Extension registration: add new procedures
ethanresnick 4ca869c
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin' into profile-extensions
ethanresnick 60d1652
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin' into profile-extensions
ethanresnick 2ff62f6
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/gh-pages' into profile-extensions
ethanresnick a22cc0e
"mappings" => "aliases" and remove naming restriction
ethanresnick baf3376
Error object: clarify that the code member isn't strictly "removed"
ethanresnick 226141b
Extensions: Make registration optional but encouraged
ethanresnick f787eac
meta start
ethanresnick 8510772
Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/profile-extensions' into profile…
ethanresnick 190079f
Merge branch 'gh-pages' into profile-extensions
ethanresnick f4ff261
Fix merge error
ethanresnick File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Add profile extension rules!
Closes #915.
- Loading branch information
commit 9b8235d246fb44b5b87025b8b0c85c1eab1f8b8c
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The prior language equated each member with a single link. The removal of the phrase creates the same issue I'm trying to resolve for relationships in #946. Another similarity to #946 is that the names of the links are not mentioned at all.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree that there's an analogy between the text here and #946.
I faced a couple problems writing this section:
links
and RFC 5988, I didn't want to introduces a term for the key (i.e. I didn't want to say whether it's the links name or a relation).So, given the above constraints, the wording in the PR was what I came up with.
Let's get this PR merged, and then we can figure out how to clarify things in #958. I'll link this thread there for reference.