I did a pass through the Ref Guide for SOLR-10494 and noted there [1] that I neglected to look for places where the output was XML but the sample request did not include "wt=xml". My intent was to look for those later, but then I forgot.
It's likely easier to find where the request is missing "wt=xml" than to change the XML examples to JSON, although having them all in JSON is preferable. If you're willing to cook up a patch for either, it would be appreciated. If you think changing them to JSON will take you a while (and it might), I'd be happy to split the work and do the pass through for missing "wt=xml" params as a temporary measure. Cassandra [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SOLR-10494?focusedCommentId=16056403&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-16056403 On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 9:47 PM, Varun Thacker <[email protected]> wrote: > I'd prefer 1> > > On Sun, Oct 22, 2017 at 7:39 PM, Jason Gerlowski <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Hey all, >> >> Was doing some poking around the ref-guide this weekend. I noticed >> that the output snippets given with the API documentation is split >> about 50/50 between xml and json. Few of the examples contain an >> explicit "wt" parameter. With the default "wt" format switching to >> json in 7.0, this means that any of the output snippets in XML format >> won't match what a user following along would see themselves. >> >> This won't trouble experienced users, but it could be a small >> speedbump for any new Solr adopters. Making the snippets match the >> API calls would make the docs more correct, and more amateur-friendly. >> >> There's two approaches we could take to bring things into better >> alignment: >> >> 1. Change all API output snippets to JSON. >> >> 2, Don't change the format of any snippets. Instead, add a "wt" >> parameter to the API call corresponding to any XML snippets, so that >> the input-call matches the output. >> >> Happy to create a JIRA and propose a patch for either approach if >> people think it's worth it, or have a particular preference on >> approach. Anyone have any thoughts? >> >> Best, >> >> Jason >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
