[regext] Re: Extensions: Clarify search results naming #41

[[e-mail]]

Hi Jasdip, Tom,

On 03.01.25 22:41, Jasdip Singh wrote:
>
> https://github.com/anewton1998/draft-regext-rdap-extensions/issues/41
>
> >> Section 2.4.4, paragraph 1
>
> >> As described in [RFC9082] and Section 2.3, an extension may define 
> new paths in URLs.  If the extension describes the behavior of an RDAP 
> query using the path to return a new RDAP search result, the JSON name 
> of the search result MUST be prepended with the extension identifier 
> (to avoid collision with search results defined in other extensions).  
> If the search result contains object class instances
>
> > I think this requirement is harmful for the protocol. Let's say I 
> want to create extension "fuz" that would offer a new way of searching 
> through objects. Let's call it fuzzySearch. I would define a new query 
> parameter "fuzzy" and append it to a path segment according to the 
> object class I would like to search through. So if I query 
> /domains?fuzzy=foo I expect as a client to still be able to process 
> the response as per rfc7483 from domainSearchResults JSON element 
> rather than special handling for fuz_domainSearchResults.
>
> [JS] Agreed. This prepending is only for newly defined RDAP search 
> result members and when a bare extension identifier is not used to 
> name such a new member. As a contrary example, the reverse domain 
> search in the RIR Search draft leverages the existing 
> “domainSearchResults” member.
>
> [TH] I think this is right, but that it may be worth spelling it out 
> in more detail.  Something like:
>
> ```
>
>     As described in [RFC9082] and Section 2.3, an extension may define
>
>     new paths in URLs.  If the extension describes the behavior of an
>
>     RDAP query using the path to return an RDAP search result for a
>
>     new object class, the JSON name of the search result MUST be
>
>     prepended with the extension identifier (to avoid collision with
>
>     search results defined in other extensions).
>
> ```
>
>
[PK] Thanks. The proposed text covers my concern.

Kind Regards,

Pawel