On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 11:55 AM, Magnus Manske <magnusman...@googlemail.com> wrote: > Using custom HTTP headers would, of course, complicate calls for the tool > authors (i.e., myself). $.ajax instead of $.get and all that. I would be > less inclined to change to that.
Yes, the limitation of HTTP headers is that it makes things a bit more complicated for tools authors. At the same time, it is a limitation that is already pushed to tools authors using the mediawiki APIs. Having a specific way of doing things for WDQS increases the overall complexity of our infrastructure. As I am more involved on the general infrastructure and not only on WDQS, I am of course biased toward a globally standardized solution more than for a WDQS specific one. I am not absolutely against having a WDQS specific solution if it makes things sufficiently easier on tools author, I just want to make sure we don't take this decision lightly... > On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 10:42 AM Guillaume Lederrey <gleder...@wikimedia.org> > wrote: >> >> On Mon, Oct 3, 2016 at 12:40 AM, Stas Malyshev <smalys...@wikimedia.org> >> wrote: >> > Hi! >> > >> >> This thread is missing some background context info as to what the >> >> issues are, if you could forward it it will be great. >> > >> > Well, I'm not talking about specific issues, except for the general need >> > of identifying which tool is responsible for which queries. Basically, >> > there are several ways of doing it: >> > >> > 1. Adding comments to the query itself >> > 2. Adding query parameters >> > 3. Adding query headers, specifically: >> > a) distinct User-Agent >> > b) distinct X-Analytics header >> > c) custom headers >> > >> > I think that 3a is good for statistics purposes, though 1 could be more >> > efficient when we need to find out who sent a particular query. 3b may >> > be superior to 3a, but I admit I don't know enough about it :) >> >> I'm a bit late to the discussion, but still... >> >> I think that as much as possible metadata about a query should be done >> via HTTP headers. This way, they are not coupled to SPARQL itself and >> can be analysed with generic tools already in place. Setting a >> user-agent is a standard best practice and seems to be part of the >> Mediawiki API guidelines [1], we should use the same guidelines, no >> reason to reinvent them. >> >> X-Analytics header might allow for more fine grained information, but >> I'm not sure this is actually needed (and using X-Analytics should not >> preclude from having a sensible user-agent). >> >> >> [1] https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Main_page#Identifying_your_client >> >> >> > -- >> > Stas Malyshev >> > smalys...@wikimedia.org >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Wikidata mailing list >> > Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org >> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata >> >> >> >> -- >> Guillaume Lederrey >> Operations Engineer, Discovery >> Wikimedia Foundation >> UTC+2 / CEST >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Analytics mailing list >> analyt...@lists.wikimedia.org >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics > > > _______________________________________________ > Wikidata mailing list > Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata > -- Guillaume Lederrey Operations Engineer, Discovery Wikimedia Foundation UTC+2 / CEST _______________________________________________ Wikidata mailing list Wikidata@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikidata
