On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 1:12 PM, Chris Anderson <jch...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 2:01 PM, Dean Landolt <d...@deanlandolt.com> wrote:
>> At the very least there should be a symmetry between the doc _show api and
>> the view _show api, and
>
> Hows this for asymmetry? :)
>
> I did not mention one alternative URL address option. Just using the
> standard view urls as they are, but adding show=true, like:
>
> GET /db/_view/mydesign/myview?startkey="b"&limit=10&show=true
>
I see where you're coming from, but I don't like this very much. My
thoughts were something along the lines of being able to have multiple
show functions per view. We could do the repeating the view code but
that's really not good.
>> while switching on passed in parameters is
>> technically all the same, the internals of _show_view functions sound like
>> they'll be complex enough with head/tail/row semantics.
>>
>
> There's another question altogether, about how to structure the design
> document.
>
I was kinda assuming it'd be something like:
{
"_id": "_design/foo",
"views": {
"bar": {
"map": "function(doc) {emit(doc._id, null);}"
}
},
"show": {
"docs": {
"xml": "function ... return doc as xml",
"doc_foo": "function ... return part of doc like ML guy wanted"
"views": {
"atom": {
"source": "bar",
"head": "function ... return head of atom stream",
"rows": "function .... etc",
"tail": "function .... miracle"
}
}
}
}
> --
> Chris Anderson
> http://jchris.mfdz.com
>
