[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1474?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15586586#comment-15586586 ]
Andy Tolbert edited comment on TINKERPOP-1474 at 10/18/16 8:32 PM: ------------------------------------------------------------------- Some questions, just because I think it would be good to clarify these points: 1. [The thread|https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/Z9harwx59p9gj9t] referenced in [~spmallette]'s comment seems to indicate the behavior of whether or not the properties are present would be configurable in some way: {quote} https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5a04893d04b6b9f8f33c163f471bcdee18cc8e23d59b02a8f591a47b@1463679213@%3Cdev.tinkerpop.apache.org%3E Just to check, will it be configurable, returning a ReferenceVertex or the Vertex together with its properties? {quote} {quote} https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/17ad6d1a9583ef9080be6b8b10b83cc60a971236b4d42f957411af99@1463679388@%3Cdev.tinkerpop.apache.org%3E The intent is for it be configurable by a new "mime type" so it would end up configurable per request. Obviously, if you do an OLAP query and all you get is a ReferenceVertex then your request for a an "upgrade" to a DetachedVertex (with properties) would go unanswered. {quote} However [~okram] says in this thread: {quote} My personal thinking on this is that if you didn't query for that data, you don't get that data. That is, ReferenceXXX by default. I think it is an overkill for GLV designers/maintainers to have to now have Vertex implementations with multi-/meta-properties, etc. It would be to the point where the GLV structure API is nearly as rich as the Java API.... thats alot of code. {quote} Given this, is the decision to not include properties on the {{Edge}} and {{Vertex}} objects in GLV? 2. The {{Edge}} implemenation in gremlin-python lacks {{inVLabel}} and {{outVLabel}}, will these always be present or not? In any case should it be included in the {{Edge}} implementation? was (Author: andrew.tolbert): Some questions, just because I think it would be good to clarify these points: 1. [The thread|https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/Z9harwx59p9gj9t] referenced in [~spmallette]'s comment seems to indicate the behavior of whether or not the properties are present would be configurable in some way: {quote} https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/5a04893d04b6b9f8f33c163f471bcdee18cc8e23d59b02a8f591a47b@1463679213@%3Cdev.tinkerpop.apache.org%3E Just to check, will it be configurable, returning a ReferenceVertex or the Vertex together with its properties? {quote} {quote} https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/17ad6d1a9583ef9080be6b8b10b83cc60a971236b4d42f957411af99@1463679388@%3Cdev.tinkerpop.apache.org%3E The intent is for it be configurable by a new "mime type" so it would end up configurable per request. Obviously, if you do an OLAP query and all you get is a ReferenceVertex then your request for a an "upgrade" to a DetachedVertex (with properties) would go unanswered. {quote} However [~okram] says in this thread: {quote} My personal thinking on this is that if you didn't query for that data, you don't get that data. That is, ReferenceXXX by default. I think it is an overkill for GLV designers/maintainers to have to now have Vertex implementations with multi-/meta-properties, etc. It would be to the point where the GLV structure API is nearly as rich as the Java API.... thats alot of code. {quote} Given this, is the decision not to include properties on the {{Edge}} and {{Vertex}} objects in GLV? 2. The {{Edge}} implemenation in gremlin-python lacks {{inVLabel}} and {{outVLabel}}, will these always be present or not? In any case should it be included in the {{Edge}} implementation? > API Alignment Between Java Gremlin Graph Structure and GLVs > ----------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: TINKERPOP-1474 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TINKERPOP-1474 > Project: TinkerPop > Issue Type: Bug > Components: io > Affects Versions: 3.2.2 > Reporter: Adam Holmberg > > The current Java GraphSON implementation and that in the Python GLV leave > some question about what *should* be returned from a simple traversal like > `g.V()`. > The java implementation presently assumes that properties could be present > and returns a DetachedVertex: > https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/blob/master/gremlin-core/src/main/java/org/apache/tinkerpop/gremlin/structure/io/graphson/GraphSONSerializersV2d0.java#L420-L433 > The python implementation assumes no such thing and returns something more > reminiscent of a ReferenceVertex: > https://github.com/apache/tinkerpop/blob/master/gremlin-python/src/main/jython/gremlin_python/structure/io/graphson.py#L238-L242 > Is the java version overreaching, and should not expect properties unless a > step calls for them (e.g. ` g.V().valueMap()` or `g.V().values('name')`, or > should the Python version be expanded? > Is there something we can do to establish guidelines for this, and align > these APIs? -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)