Uploaded image for project: 'FOLIO'
  1. FOLIO
  2. FOLIO-1716

Uniquely identify backend API validation errors

    XMLWordPrintable

    Details

    • Template:
    • Development Team:
      Core: Platform
    • Affected Institution:
      GBV

      Description

      It seems we have started using code as part of validation error in order to:

      • make decisions based upon the presence of a specific validation error in the client
      • facilitate localization of validation error messages in the client

      See https://github.com/folio-org/raml/blob/raml1.0/schemas/error.schema

      Is this intended to be the standard approach?

      Does the UI currently use some of the existing examples?

      If it is intended to be the standard approach, I believe there are some decisions we could need to make.

      Potential Decisions

      • Should all validation error messages be expected to have a unique code? (and if so, should this be part of the definition of done for backend stories?
      • How should these codes be named?
      • Are codes owned by interfaces or implementing modules?
      • How do we avoid naming conflicts between modules?
      • How does a client know what the set of potential unique errors are?
      • If used for localisation, how does a client map parameterised errors to messages?

        TestRail: Results

          Attachments

            Issue Links

              Activity

                People

                Assignee:
                Unassigned Unassigned
                Reporter:
                marcjohnson Marc Johnson
                Votes:
                0 Vote for this issue
                Watchers:
                9 Start watching this issue

                  Dates

                  Created:
                  Updated:
                  Resolved:

                    TestRail: Runs

                      TestRail: Cases