What's the correct way to specify Sparse Fieldsets for Deep Relationship Includes?

1

Hi

The specification is quite clear on the use of the include parameter - it clearly indicates that dot notation should be used to specify relationship paths, e.g. comments.author in the #Spec: Fetching-includes section

What the spec is not clear on how this translates to sparse fieldsets (i.e. no mention of dot notation).

For example, a contrived example

Which is more in-line with the specification, option 1 or option 2

  1. GET
    /api/people
    ?fields[people]=name,createdAt
    &fields[group]=name,budget
    &fields[group.division]=name,address
    &fields[group.division.managers]=name,telephone
    &include=group,group.division,group.division.managers
  2. GET
    /api/people
    ?fields[people]=name,createdAt
    &fields[group]=name,budget,division.name,division.address,division.managers.name,division.managers.telephone
    &include=group,group.division,group.division.managers

Where a:

  • A Person has a Group.
  • Group has a Division
  • Division has a list of Managers

Thanks
~the fool

2

Keep in mind that a single resource may be included via multiple relationship with multiple other resources, so there’s no practical way to specify a single set of fields via relationship.

Fields are instead specified by type, so you should have params like fields[group], fields[division], fields[manager], etc.

3

Hi dgeb

Thanks for your response. Feels clean. I was just curious if the spec was going to become stricter in this regard and thought I’d cover that base now. First time I’m implementing the JSON API spec.