https://bugs.koha-community.org/bugzilla3/show_bug.cgi?id=28201 Julian Maurice <julian.maurice@biblibre.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|Failed QA |In Discussion --- Comment #14 from Julian Maurice <julian.maurice@biblibre.com> --- (In reply to Tomás Cohen Arazi from comment #4)
I like where this is going, but I think this needs some more thinking.
In my opinion: - The request body should include the raw record - Content/Type should tell the controller how it should handle the raw record in terms of serialization format (i.e. application/marcxml+xml, application/marc-in-json, etc) - The framework should be passed as a header. I propose x-koha-cataloguing-fw to ease your work. - We still need the 'biblio_metadata.schema' attribute, put it in some header as well: x-koha-metadata-schema.
The more I think about this, the more I disagree with it. The frameworkcode is a property of a biblio record in the same way as the MARC record. I don't see why it shouldn't be passed with the body. Especially as the response to GET /biblio/:id already returns the frameworkcode in the response body. Actually, I think we should go in the opposite direction and pass the MARC record inside a "metadata" property. Something like this: POST /api/v1/biblios { "framework_id": "", "metadata": [ { "format": "marcxml", "schema": "UNIMARC", "metadata": "<record>...</record>" } ] } It's more in line with the database structure. And we may want to set other columns of biblio or biblioitems (for those that are not mapped to a MARC subfield) What do you think ? -- You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes. You are the assignee for the bug.