Hi,

Any further discussion on this mail? I'm going to list all APIs and check
which part we should modify.

Best Regards!
@ Zhiyuan Ju <https://github.com/juzhiyuan>


Zhiyuan Ju <juzhiy...@apache.org> 于2021年7月22日周四 下午2:47写道:

> I would prefer relying on Status Code instead of `code` (actually it's a
> manual logical and extendable code).
>
> Why not list all API cases then have a choice?
>
> Best Regards!
> @ Zhiyuan Ju <https://github.com/juzhiyuan>
>
>
> Ming Wen <wenm...@apache.org> 于2021年7月22日周四 下午12:36写道:
>
>> please give an example about i18n for a better understanding
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Ming Wen, Apache APISIX PMC Chair
>> Twitter: _WenMing
>>
>>
>> JunXu Chen <chenju...@apache.org> 于2021年7月22日周四 上午11:36写道:
>>
>> > Agree +1
>> >
>> >
>> > I think we still need to keep the `code` field.
>> >
>> > The FE needs to implement i18n according to it.
>> >
>> > Unless `message` is semantic and can be used as a key of i18n.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, 22 Jul 2021 at 00:02, Ming Wen <wenm...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > > I don't think the `code` filed is useful, HTTP response code is
>> enough.
>> > >
>> > > Thanks,
>> > > Ming Wen, Apache APISIX PMC Chair
>> > > Twitter: _WenMing
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Peter Zhu <sta...@apache.org> 于2021年7月21日周三 下午11:18写道:
>> > >
>> > > > Agree +1.
>> > > > And I think we should maintain the `code` filed and maintain the
>> doc of
>> > > > API.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>

Reply via email to