Additional objects

[sebgie]

closes #2620

• moved aspect -> filters
• updated tests
• fixed inconsistency in pagination object
• changed filter object to filters: {tags:[{id: 1, ...}]}

[hswolff]

I didn't wrap the filters in an array as I think that this should be done when we implement the functionality.

I think it'd be good to get the filter returned object consistent and create it as an array from the start.

We do know that it will be the case that we'll support multiple filters as querying for a certain tag with a given author is something that we'll want. If it was more hazy about what this filter param would support then I'd agree we should wait, but this is something that we know is coming down the pipeline.

[sebgie]

@hswolff I didn't want to anticipate any future implementation. I could update the object as follows:

filters: [{
    tags: [{
        id: 1,
        ....
    }]
}]

It will then use the first element of the first tags object for now and if multiple resources are needed we can update it accordingly?

[ErisDS]

👍

[hswolff]

I'm imagining an API that would request posts?tags=foo,bar&author=2 which I'd hope to get back an API of:

filters: {
    tags: [{
        id: foo,
        ....
    }, {
        id: bar
    }],
    authors: [{
        id: 2
    }]
}

Then again I don't want to go down the road of premature optimization too much so take all I say with that grain.

I just do imagine this is a future we will have.

[sebgie]

filters: [{},{}] or filter: {}?

That was the point where I decided to write:

I didn't wrap the filters in an array as I think that this should be done when we implement the functionality.

Without any code in place I think that your option using filter: {} seems better because otherwise we would end up with an array of different objects. The array version would imo be closer to JSON API if your point of view is that every object (tag/author/...) represents a filter?

[ErisDS]

I am hoping for that future to be a reality very, very soon 😸

[ErisDS]

I think @hswolff's structure makes sense?

[hswolff]

That was the point where I decided to write:

Aha, I mis-read then, my mistake, apologies. Carry on then. :B

[sebgie]

@hswolff no, I'm happy if we get to a decision .

If no one has an objection to the following format we should use it. I took @hswolff's structure and renamed filters to filter.

filter: {
    tags: [{
        id: foo,
        ....
    }, {
        id: bar
    }],
    authors: [{
        id: 2
    }]
}

[ErisDS]

👍

[hswolff]

👍

[sebgie]

Updated! I think the build needs a restart as it worked on my repo (https://travis-ci.org/sebgie/Ghost/builds/23877352).