We read every piece of feedback, and take your input very seriously.
To see all available qualifiers, see our documentation.
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Some of our service endpoints needs to accept a path parameter followed by an optional .json extension, e.g.
.json
http://foo.com/api/id-12345.json
Currently ring-swagger produces uri's that does not look quite right, e.g.
user=> (require '[ring.swagger.swagger2 :as rs]) user=> (rs/swagger-json {:paths {"/api/:id.json" {:get {:parameters {:path {:id String}}}}}}) {:swagger "2.0", :info {:title "Swagger API", :version "0.0.1"}, :produces ["application/json"], :consumes ["application/json"], :paths {"/api/{id.json}" ;; <= HERE uh-oh {:get {:parameters [{:in :path, :name "id", :description "", :required true, :type "string"}], :responses {:default {:description ""}}}}}, :definitions {}}
For me, "/api/{id}.json" looks better than "/api/{id.json}".
"/api/{id}.json"
"/api/{id.json}"
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
bcee7e9
Split path-parameter from `., fixes #82
02f205b
No branches or pull requests
Some of our service endpoints needs to accept a path parameter followed by an optional
.json
extension, e.g.Currently ring-swagger produces uri's that does not look quite right, e.g.
For me,
"/api/{id}.json"
looks better than"/api/{id.json}"
.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: