Skip to content
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

Related Lists doesn't reflect REST API specification. #4

Closed
gmcnicol opened this issue Apr 11, 2024 · 4 comments
Closed

Related Lists doesn't reflect REST API specification. #4

gmcnicol opened this issue Apr 11, 2024 · 4 comments

Comments

@gmcnicol
Copy link

When creating a new RelatedListOperations object, the SDK requires you to set a layout ID. This is not a requirement of the REST API, where the required argument is the module name. The Standard layout for that module should be used by default.

There is no way to specify the module name at all.

@raja-7453
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks, @gmcnicol for your contribution. Please refer to this sample code for RelatedList Operations.

@gmcnicol
Copy link
Author

gmcnicol commented Apr 11, 2024

@raja-7453 this raises more questions:

How did you get the magic string for the layout ID?
Why is it mandatory when it isn't in the REST API?

This is still a bug, even in 2.0.

@raja-7453
Copy link
Collaborator

@gmcnicol In both the getRelatedLists and getRelatedList methods, the layout ID is common, and included as a parameter in the class constructor. Please note that the Layout ID is optional, as demonstrated in the provided sample code. This applies to both versions, v1.0.0 and v2.0.0. Could you please specify where you found that the Layout ID is a mandatory parameter?

We are currently updating the sample codes for all methods, and they will be published soon. However, as you had specific concerns regarding these methods, we have prioritized and updated the sample codes for these methods alone at this time.

@gmcnicol
Copy link
Author

gmcnicol commented Apr 15, 2024

Thanks. This was a 100% skill issue on my part.

All resolved.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants