I'd like to generate an adaptive card that contains an arbitrary JSON
object inside.
I anticipate that the JSON object will be shallow.
Maybe it will contain just a list of key-value pairs.
But I won't know the structure of that JSON object until runtime.
For this reason, I can't templatize this portion of the adaptive card.
It would be ideal if I could embed the JSON inside of a codeblock, but I don't know if that's supported.
Alternatively, I'd be willing to embed the JSON inside of a monotype textbox.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Embedding JSON inside of a codeblock isn't yet supported, although that would indeed be a great way to solve this use case.
A template isn't necessarily static or fixed. If you're planning to "expand" your template with the AdaptiveCards.Templating NuGet package for instance, you'll have the occasion to load the template into memory. At this time, you can mutate the template according to the incoming JSON at runtime. This isn't an ideal solution, but it is a way to accommodate a truly arbitrary JSON object.
If, on the other hand, if you anticipate that the JSON object will merely be a list of key-value pairs, you can use data binding.
Related
I want to create a Data Struct (DS) in GOLANG given a random JSON file. That is, take the JSON file's content and unmarshall it into the DS.
Looking around, I have found solutions on how to create such DS which require knowing beforehand the JSON format (Key:value pairs, types of the values, etc.). To do that, it would be also required to 'manually' enter the fields of the struct, and then unmarshall the JSON content into it. Of course, you can always create a small script that does that. However, that seems a bit unpractical, but not entirely impossible or unimplementable.
Do you know a more straightforward way to achieve this?
I think I also found something about porting the JSON's content into an interface, but I am sure (not 100%, though), that we will want to keep these data in a more static format, i.e. a DS. Is there a way to transform this hypothetical interface to a DS?
may be you can try to do this using https://github.com/golang/go/blob/e7f2e5697ac8b9b6ebfb3e0d059a8c318b4709eb/src/encoding/json/stream.go#L371
In django view I want to be able to serialize whole context, that is usually used to send to template (typically by calling render and passing locals).
I want to experiment with SPA+API and possibilities to go forward with and I'd like to create function, that would serialize locals to json and return it as json response.
Now problem is, that locals is typically mix of lists, dists and querysets of models.
I can serialize models using django.core.serializers or using django-rest-framework. I can serialize dict with primitive types using json library, but I don't know any simple way how to do mix of those.
Ideal would be way to go through locals dictionary and replace all found models with their serialized representations and then put it all together, maybe even specify before what serializer (in sense of drf) to use for which model. But I really don't want to reinvent wheel in case it already exists.
Anoher question is - is this even a good idea to try to do this? Return json context as alternative to server side rendering? I am in prototyping stage so I am still thinking of how to move forward and any input in the area is appreciated.
I would recommand to go with DRF
ModelSerializer will return a Json encoded array of model
Serializer with DictField will return a Json encoded dict
Serializer with ListField will return a Json encoded list
You can create Serializer with field is another Serializer for nesting purpose.
https://www.django-rest-framework.org/api-guide/fields/#composite-fields
https://www.django-rest-framework.org/api-guide/serializers/#dealing-with-nested-objects
For your' question is this a good idea, i would said :
If you push data to an external source (not django) it's fine
If you push data to django template it's a bad idea, you loose a lot of django power :(
To keep this simple:
I have classes defined in typescript which have methods and properties (with lots of getter/setter logic). I then retrieve json data matching such classes. I need to be able to project these json objects into my "smart" classes. I know about class transformer but I wonder if this is really go-to approach to do this kind of stuff. Furthermore, I'm planning on using ngrx, so this whole class-transformation just looks wrong (server to json, json to state, state to class? and viceversa? I just dont see a clear pattern.
Any clarity is appreciated. Thanks!
I'm doing almost exactly what you describe in a fairly large app.
I'm using class-transformer to transform the JSON from http calls to instances of the appropriate objects, and then using the resulting objects as state in a store (except that I'm using Redux instead of ngrx).
I find that it works very well.
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "server to json, json to state, state to class? and viceversa?".
For me (using your terminology), it's server to json, json to class, class to state
(but state is just a collection of objects, i.e. class instances. I.E. state is objects).
If I need to send state back to the server, then yes, I typically pull the appropriate objects from the store, serialize them to JSON, and send them to the server. But...the Angular HttpClient does the serialization for you, so you don't typically have to write that part, unless you need some custom serialization.
I have java library that runs webservices and these return a response in XML. The webservices all revolve around giving a list of details about items. Recently, changes were made to allow the services to return JSON by simply converting the XML to JSON. When looking at the responses, I saw they're not as easy to parse as I thought. For example, a webservice that returns details about items.
If there are no items, the returned JSON is as follows:
{"ItemResponse":""}
If there is 1 item, the response is as follows (now itemResponse has a object as value instead of a string):
{"ItemResponse":{"Items":{"Name":"Item1","Cost":"$5"}}}
If there two or more items, the response is (now items has an array as value instead of an object):
{"ItemResponse":{"Items":[{"Name":"Item1","Cost":"$5"},{"Name":"Item2","Cost":"$3"}]}}
To parse these you need several if/else which I think are clunky.
Would it be an improvement if the responses were:
0 items: []
1 item: [{"Name":"Item1","Cost":"$5"}]
2 items: [{"Name":"Item1","Cost":"$5"},{"Name":"Item2","Cost":"$3"}]
This way there is always an array, and it contains the itemdata. An extra wrapper object is possible:
0 items: {"Items":[]}
1 item: {"Items":[{"Name":"Item1","Cost":"$5"}]}
2 items: {"Items":[{"Name":"Item1","Cost":"$5"},{"Name":"Item2","Cost":"$3"}]}
I'm not experienced in JSON so my question is, if you were a developer having to use these webservices, how would you expect the JSON resonse to be formatted? Is it better to always return a consistent array, even if there are no items or is this usually not important? Or is an array not enough and do you really expect a wrapper object around the array?
What are conventions/standards regarding this?
Don't switch result types, always return an array if there are more items possible. Do not mix, for 1 item an object for more an array. That's not a good idea.
Another best practise is that you should version your API. Use something like yoursite.com/api/v1/endpoint. If you don't do this and you change the response of your API. All your client apps will break. So keep this in mind together with documentation. (I've seen this happen a lot in the past..)
As a developer I personally like your second approach, but again it's a preference. There is no standard for this.
There are several reasons to use json:
much more dense and compact: thus data sent is less
in javascript you can directly access those properties without parsing anything. this means you could convert it into an object read the attributes (often used for AJAX)
also in java you usually don't need to parse the json by yourself - there are several nice libs like www.json.org/java/index.html
if you need to know how json is build ... use google ... there tons of infos.
To your actual questions:
for webservices you often could choose between xml and json as a "consumer" try:
https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/place/textsearch/json
and
https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/place/textsearch/xml
there is no need to format json visually - is it not meant for reading like xml
if your response doesn't have a result, json-service often still is giving a response text - look again at the upper google map links - those are including a response status which makes sense as it is a service.
Nevertheless it's the question if it is worth converting from xml to json if there isn't a specific requirement. As Dieter mentioned: it depends on who is already using this service and how they are consumed ... which means the surrounding environment is very important.
I'm working on a custom control that will be fed by JSON content and I'm trying to find the best approach to produce and consume it.
Let say the JSON could be from:
Notes View (all documents)
Notes View (subset of documents based on a category or filter)
Notes Document Collection (from database.Search or database.FTSearch)
What I have on my mind is to define some Custom Properties where I can define:
URL that produces the JSON
Object
etc.
So far I'm considering:
REST Service control from ExtLib
XAgent that produces JSON
Domino URL ?ReadViewEntries and OutputFormat=JSON
Does anyone knows if the JSON object loaded in memory has a size limit?
Any suggestion will be appreciated.
Definitely go for the REST Service control from the Extension Library, offers by far the best combination of flexibility vs performance vs development time.
Matt
What about creating the JSON in the view itself and then just read the column values? http://www.eknori.de/2011-07-23/formula-magic/
If you want to parse the json object using ssjs, you can fetch it using an URLConnection and put the resulting object into a repeat control using the eval statement.