[FC-0118] docs: ADR for normalizing nested json apis#38305
[FC-0118] docs: ADR for normalizing nested json apis#38305taimoor-ahmed-1 wants to merge 1 commit intoopenedx:docs/ADRs-axim_api_improvementsfrom
Conversation
|
Thanks for the pull request, @taimoor-ahmed-1! This repository is currently maintained by 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 approvalIf you haven't already, check this list to see if your contribution needs to go through the product review process.
🔘 Provide contextTo 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:
🔘 Get a green buildIf one or more checks are failing, continue working on your changes until this is no longer the case and your build turns green. DetailsWhere 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:
💡 As a result it may take up to several weeks or months to complete a review and merge your PR. |
| 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) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Above you have depth and requested_fields as the params, but here you have fields=...? Both seem fine but we should be consistent.
| **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 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added an exception clause
|
|
||
| * Cons / Costs | ||
|
|
||
| * Must maintain multiple representations; requires careful schema/versioning discipline. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you elaborate on this? Why would we maintain multiple representations?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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. |
7792d0f to
5b316e2
Compare
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