[Subresource] Fixed the serialization context builder #1617
Conversation
| @@ -111,6 +111,8 @@ public function load($data, $type = null): RouteCollection | |||
| 'property' => $operation['property'], | |||
| 'identifiers' => $operation['identifiers'], | |||
| 'collection' => $operation['collection'], | |||
| 'parent_resource_class' => $resourceClass, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can't say that it's the "parent" because there can be an "infinity" IMO.
Anyway, we need to discuss here is whether we take the "Root" as the metadata entrypoint or the "Queue" (last).
Explanation:
/foo/1/bars/2
This path will get you an entity of type Bar. When this is serialized, where should we look to get the normalization_context?
Barmetadata, after all this is aBarresponseFoometadata, because it's a subresource
We need to choose one. At the moment, IIRC the code looks on the Bar metadata to find the normalization_context for the given operation.
If we want to take the "Root" (because this is where we declared the subresource), I don't think that you need the "parent_resource_class".
Take a look at the SubresourceOperationFactory:
$rootClass = $identifiers[0][1] is where you want to look at.
the operation_name should be the correct one IMO
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I vote for:
Foo metadata, because it's a subresource
$rootClass = $identifiers[0][1] is where you want to look at.
yes I noticed that. But I thought it was risky to use that ;)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes I noticed that. But I thought it was risky to use that ;)
It is not and it's meant for that ;)
|
Anyway I think there are edge cases that may be hard to cover. I haven't slept enough to give a more detailled though on this haha but I'll think about it. |
|
No problem. But for now (and for me) the subresource system is not usable yet :/ as I can not control what the API returns. |
|
So what do you think of this ? Is it the right approach? |
|
Having the Though, you don't need |
|
Sure. I will update the pr according to |
|
Closing in favor of #2706 |
Before going further, I would like to know if this is the right direction.