Simple search API proposal, take 2

[Jamie McCracken]

Mikkel Kamstrup Erlandsen wrote:
> The HitID would be opaque, so any server could use the uri if it wanted 
> to do that.

I was thinking of the clients!



>  
> 
>     If a HItID is used it could place extra burden on the client to manage
>     HitID->URI transfers. I guess looking at real world apps and their needs
>     will determine which is more suitable...
> 
> 
> 
> I don't think I understand the complications... What is the problem in 
> requesting the uri property of the hits?

if the live signals (HitAdded, HitRemoved) only contained HitID and not 
URI then clients would need to manage the HitID->URI relationship

On the other hand maybe the signals should send both HitID and URI so 
allowing the client to manage them in either fashion?



-- 
Mr Jamie McCracken
http://jamiemcc.livejournal.com/