Skip to content

[FC-0118] docs: ADR for normalizing nested json apis#38305

Open
taimoor-ahmed-1 wants to merge 1 commit intoopenedx:docs/ADRs-axim_api_improvementsfrom
edly-io:docs/ADR-normalize_nested_json_apis
Open

[FC-0118] docs: ADR for normalizing nested json apis#38305
taimoor-ahmed-1 wants to merge 1 commit intoopenedx:docs/ADRs-axim_api_improvementsfrom
edly-io:docs/ADR-normalize_nested_json_apis

Conversation

@taimoor-ahmed-1
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@taimoor-ahmed-1 taimoor-ahmed-1 commented Apr 8, 2026

Description

Adds ADR-0036 documenting the strategy for reducing deeply nested JSON payloads across Open edX APIs.

Some endpoints (course block trees, OLX structure, progress views) return large, deeply nested responses that are expensive to parse for both human clients and automated agents. This ADR establishes:

?view=minimal / ?fields=... query params as the standard convention for requesting a stripped-down representation of complex resources
Prefer IDs + follow-up endpoints over embedding entire sub-trees inline (e.g. return block IDs in a list response, fetch full block data via a detail endpoint)
Document all response variants (minimal vs. full) in OpenAPI schemas

@openedx-webhooks openedx-webhooks added the open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U label Apr 8, 2026
@openedx-webhooks
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Thanks for the pull request, @taimoor-ahmed-1!

This repository is currently maintained by @openedx/wg-maintenance-openedx-platform.

Once you've gone through the following steps feel free to tag them in a comment and let them know that your changes are ready for engineering review.

🔘 Get product approval

If you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.

  • If it does, you'll need to submit a product proposal for your contribution, and have it reviewed by the Product Working Group.
    • This process (including the steps you'll need to take) is documented here.
  • If it doesn't, simply proceed with the next step.
🔘 Provide context

To help your reviewers and other members of the community understand the purpose and larger context of your changes, feel free to add as much of the following information to the PR description as you can:

  • Dependencies

    This PR must be merged before / after / at the same time as ...

  • Blockers

    This PR is waiting for OEP-1234 to be accepted.

  • Timeline information

    This PR must be merged by XX date because ...

  • Partner information

    This is for a course on edx.org.

  • Supporting documentation
  • Relevant Open edX discussion forum threads
🔘 Get a green build

If one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green.

Details
Where can I find more information?

If you'd like to get more details on all aspects of the review process for open source pull requests (OSPRs), check out the following resources:

When can I expect my changes to be merged?

Our goal is to get community contributions seen and reviewed as efficiently as possible.

However, the amount of time that it takes to review and merge a PR can vary significantly based on factors such as:

  • The size and impact of the changes that it introduces
  • The need for product review
  • Maintenance status of the parent repository

💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR.

@taimoor-ahmed-1 taimoor-ahmed-1 self-assigned this Apr 8, 2026
@github-project-automation github-project-automation Bot moved this to Needs Triage in Contributions Apr 8, 2026
@taimoor-ahmed-1 taimoor-ahmed-1 changed the title docs: ADR for normalizing nested json apis [FC-0118] docs: ADR for normalizing nested json apis Apr 8, 2026
@mphilbrick211 mphilbrick211 added the FC Relates to an Axim Funded Contribution project label Apr 8, 2026
@mphilbrick211 mphilbrick211 moved this from Needs Triage to Ready for Review in Contributions Apr 8, 2026
Comment on lines +49 to +56
GET /api/courses/v1/blocks/<usage_id>/?depth=1&requested_fields=id,type,display_name
GET /api/course_structure/v1/?view=minimal

**Response shape (minimal vs full):**

.. code-block:: json

// minimal (?view=minimal or ?fields=id,type,display_name,children)
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Above you have depth and requested_fields as the params, but here you have fields=...? Both seem fine but we should be consistent.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done

Comment on lines +66 to +71
**Prefer IDs + follow-up over embedding:**

.. code-block:: text

GET /api/courses/v1/blocks/ → returns block IDs and types
GET /api/courses/v1/blocks/<id>/ → returns full block when needed
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is good for programmatic used but can be really costly for MFEs for example where they want to be able to request everything they need with a minimal number of requests. Is there some nuance we can add here about when it would be okay to use the full view?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Added an exception clause


* Cons / Costs

* Must maintain multiple representations; requires careful schema/versioning discipline.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Can you elaborate on this? Why would we maintain multiple representations?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There will be separate serializer code paths, separate tests, separate OpenAPI schema entries for each variant, all of which must stay in sync as the data model evolves.

References
==========

* “Hard-to-Parse Deeply Nested JSON” recommendation in the Open edX REST API standardization notes.
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Link to the notes.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done

@taimoor-ahmed-1 taimoor-ahmed-1 force-pushed the docs/ADR-normalize_nested_json_apis branch from 7792d0f to 5b316e2 Compare April 22, 2026 09:11
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

FC Relates to an Axim Funded Contribution project open-source-contribution PR author is not from Axim or 2U

Projects

Status: Ready for Review

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants