On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Paul Davis
paul.joseph.da...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Chris Anderson jch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Ulises ulises.cerv...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 on render
The other thing I think we must think about, since
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 3:18 AM, Chris Anderson jch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Paul Davis
paul.joseph.da...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Chris Anderson jch...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Ulises ulises.cerv...@gmail.com
On 13 Jan 2009, at 09:18, Chris Anderson wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:38 PM, Paul Davis
paul.joseph.da...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 2:27 AM, Chris Anderson jch...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Ulises
ulises.cerv...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 on render
As
On 13.01.2009, at 08:27, Chris Anderson wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Ulises ulises.cerv...@gmail.com
wrote:
+1 on render
The other thing I think we must think about, since we're discussing
naming here, is that I'd hate to have two different names one for
show_docs and one for
:30 AM
Subject: Re: _show API (née _form)
On 13.01.2009, at 08:27, Chris Anderson wrote:
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Ulises ulises.cerv...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 on render
The other thing I think we must think about, since we're discussing
naming here, is that I'd hate to have two different
On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:21 PM, Bradford Winfrey
bradswinf...@yahoo.comwrote:
Render seems to provide a nice, clear definition for taking data (from a
view view) and transforming (rendering) that data into something more
useful.
Brad
It also makes sense when taking data (from a doc) and
On 13 Jan 2009, at 18:06, Christopher Lenz wrote:
I'm not a fan of show and list. They're (a) not descriptive (too
generic) and (b) not nicely pluralizable for use as a property name
in the design docs. For example, show is a verb, and when you
pluralize that (as Jan did later on this
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 12:21 AM, Ulises ulises.cerv...@gmail.com wrote:
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
A) GET /db/_show_view/mydesign/myview
B) GET /db/_show_view/mydesign/myshowfunc/myview
C) GET /db/_view/mydesign/myview?strartkey=fooshow=myshowfunc
Call me thick but C looks cleaner to me.
{
...
show : {
docs : { ... },
views : {
myshowfunc : function(row, head) { ... }
}
}
I read the options as
A) GET /db/_show_view/mydesign/myview
show me data from myview (how that data is presented I don't know)
B) GET /db/_show_view/mydesign/myshowfunc/myview
show me data in _myshowfunc_format_ from the set _myview_
C) GET
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:57 AM, Ulises ulises.cerv...@gmail.com wrote:
A) GET /db/_show_view/mydesign/myview
B) GET /db/_show_view/mydesign/myshowfunc/myview
C) GET /db/_view/mydesign/myview?strartkey=fooshow=myshowfunc
Call me thick but C looks cleaner to me.
{
...
show : {
docs : {
Subject: Re: _show API (née _form)
_render?
GET /db/_render/sofa/recent-posts/as-html/
Reads nicely, IMHO.
K.
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 4:05 PM, Chris Anderson jch...@gmail.com wrote:
_view_show might even be better than _show_view, I think it's a little
easier to look at and say.
On Mon, Jan 12
that's the best definition
thus far especially when using as as the preposition to the format type.
Brad
From: kowsik kow...@gmail.com
To: dev@couchdb.apache.org
Sent: Monday, January 12, 2009 6:22:20 PM
Subject: Re: _show API (née _form)
_render
On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 11:08 PM, Ulises ulises.cerv...@gmail.com wrote:
+1 on render
The other thing I think we must think about, since we're discussing
naming here, is that I'd hate to have two different names one for
show_docs and one for show_views. From a user's point of view, I
Renaming to _show: +1
Keeping multiple functions: +1
Multiple functions would allow me to do things like:
http://127.0.0.1:5984/db_name/_show/foo/xml/docid right?
It seems like multiple functions would reduce complexity in the show
function implementations. Also, isn't this just the same as
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 4:51 PM, Paul Davis paul.joseph.da...@gmail.comwrote:
Renaming to _show: +1
Keeping multiple functions: +1
Multiple functions would allow me to do things like:
http://127.0.0.1:5984/db_name/_show/foo/xml/docid right?
It seems like multiple functions would reduce
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
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
On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Paul Davis paul.joseph.da...@gmail.comwrote:
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
19 matches
Mail list logo
