This way I was able to get all the information already put together by IApiVersionDescriptionProvider for each version, such as deprecation status, etc. and the twin set of endpoint routes are properly divided between "Organizations" and "Subscribers" groups. How is TouchID more secure than a simple password? You could, however, build some extension methods or some other collaborator with functions that can compute these values. Ah, disregard, was some unrelated conflicts between classes and schemaIds for those classes preventing certain files from being generated.

Edited: I've modified the repository to support automatic GroupName + API version document generation. It's possible for you to flat the list down to API Version + Billing Group in the GroupName, but you'll need a custom IActionDescriptionProvider to do it. Deprecated also does not mean unsupported. [ApiVersion( "3.0.authoring" )] privacy statement. If there is a performance issue, that should be external inside ASP.NET Core itself. The only thing you're really doing is filtering things down. Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience. The URL conventions are purely about serving the files directly from your own application. I've had people ask me about having a Swagger document per resource (e.g. I used the version to link to IApiVersionDescriptionProvider. Connect and share knowledge within a single location that is structured and easy to search. The challenge is that multi-level (2+) grouping is not intrinsically supported so there's no way that API Versioning can just do it for you. It may, however, still be possible to get the value before it's overwritten, get the value from the ApiExplorerModel, or inspect the ApiExplorerSettingsAttribute in the controller metadata. Happy to continue providing whatever guidance you may need. rev2022.7.21.42639. However, you can keep the issue closed for now until we get more clarity on swagger requirements and we're at a point to put more effort in. Grouping of API methods in documentation - is there some custom attribute, Route Disambiguation in ASP.NET Core (MVC 6). ApiDescription.GetApiVersion()). you don't really need to have split the Swagger documents up this way unless you're trying to reduce the size of the documents or focus in on relevance. provider.Items is returning v1 and v2, even thought all my controllers have a GroupName set. [ApiVersion( "3.0.authoring" )] At this time, we need them. Our only current idea is to go to generic versioning with single swagger per version and sepearate the authoring vs session groups by moving it to a new .net core project. /api/v3-authoring/Orders/5 Since changing the out-of-the-box experience is not an option for you, I really can only think of two recommendations. (I didn't know where was way to reference the status as 'S') can see the ApiVersions detected in the Swagger ui here: As mentioned above, I'm still seeing problem where even though all Api are detected and formatted it's not generate the swagger.json for those API which we would need to submit to APIM and for the general Swagger UI to function correctly since it's relying on reading the .json response from the endpoint to generate the UI. How did this note help previous owner of this old film camera? Where developers & technologists share private knowledge with coworkers, Reach developers & technologists worldwide. To get the result you want, do not conflate API version status with how you want to group; they are different, unrelated concepts. In ASP.NET Core, this is typically driven by the GroupName. The number and generation of OpenAPI documents are completely separate from API Versioning. - Roy Thomas Fielding. You can extract the value from this attribute and concatenate it with the API version. If it is not yet possible to do this with the ASP.NET Core version of Swashbucklee, then a full-CLR (Web API 2.2?) It seems you're trying to document a monetizable product, which may warrant the investment. I hope that helps. No, that isn't true. v1/mobile/42 and v2/mobile/42 are not two different resources (or they shouldn't be); they are different representations. The ApiVersion implements IFormattable. v1-mobile will never match v1/mobile. NETCORE example explains rabbitmq dead letter queue and delay queue, asp. The IActionDescriptionProvider design doesn't really support this concept. If there is way to mitigate this issue, I'm willing to consider it as a future enhancement. Could you provide me with a little more guidance to implement Option 1? Our thought was maybe there is some hack like making the version name include a slash such as When the interfaces reach several hundred, we need to distinguish which are framework interfaces and which are business interfaces. If you were just trying to put up simple documentation endpoint for your internal services, I could see the resistance to investing in extensive customization. Create and register a custom IActionDescriptionProvider that runs after API Versioning. Therefore, oneos Lite also supports lvgl8.2.This article is about the process of adapting lvgl8.2 based on oneos Lite for sharing. Unfortunately, it doesn't include multiple levels of grouping. With the iteration of lvgl version, lvgl8.2 cooperatessquarelineVisual development tools have become a better choice. You either follow the constraints - all of the constraints, or you aren't doing REST." "REST is a system of constraints. At this time, it is a good choice to group the interfaces of swagger UI. Perhaps I need some additional logic to check whether there is at least one controller with ApiDescription.GroupName = Mobile that has APIVersionAttribute = V2? opt.SubstitutionFormat = "VV/S"; It seems only coincidence that it was the first option and threw me off. Your IApiDescriptionProvider implementation would then look for this attribute and use its value, if present. I will just reply with what I know now. We haven't solved the issued, but it's mostly because of inaction. It combines [ApiExplorerSettings(GroupName = "GroupName")] with version grouping to achieve the desired result. Full solution for issue, [ApiVersion( "3.0.session" )] I'm struggling to think of how you can make this work on the ASP.NET Core side. I still need to confirm that this IS or IS NOT possible. Have a question about this project? If that solution doesn't work the way you want, then you can always create your own attribute to provide this metadata. [Route("api/v{version:apiVersion}/[controller]")]. (E.g. Something like: so I've no way to tell my API consumers that V1 of public API is deprecated (or obsolete) and that they consider using a superior version? [ApiVersion( "3.0.session" )] When you introduce versioning, most cases need to be grouped by API version or the document would become invalid because you cannot have duplicate URLs. If you just want to filter by relevance, it might be easier to just tweak the client-side scripts to support filtering API sets. I've updated my question, based on your very helpful input. Do weekend days count as part of a vacation? Cool, thanks ttkoma, had time to look at this again and believe I everything works as described except for the swagger file generation. Net core3.1 cookie and JWT mixed authentication authorization to achieve a variety of authentication schemes, application. The way your solution is organized makes no difference to API Versioning. How does a tailplane provide downforce if it has the same AoA as the main wing? By generating the documents yourself, you might have tool that outputs: Each document contains a single API per version. I should have read the error more closely. I don't have a solution for that, but I suspect there are workarounds for it. Is there an extension method we can over ride? Organizing by version (as group) -> name is simple and painless albeit not how you prefer it to be arranged. Individual APIs will still correctly report and show that they are deprecated, even if there are other APIs in the same version that are supported.

Ive provided Consuls Heart Rate Car Interface here. I had a similar intent. To subscribe to this RSS feed, copy and paste this URL into your RSS reader. It was my understanding we associated a single unfiltered swagger doc per APIM endpoint. To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers. You might want to review the Swagger UI documentation for more information. Answer for Can Babel node execute import and export. }); Swagger doc definition: Also, it is very unfortunate that [SwaggerOperation] can only be applied on methods/actions. Hope someone can help or suggest a work around. An API version reported by the IApiVersionDescriptionProvider is only considered deprecated all-up, if and only if, all of the APIs in that version are deprecated. However, I'm facing this: provider.Items is returning v1 and v2, even thought all my controllers have a GroupName set.

At this point, you should reorder everything and bucketize based on API Version + Billing Group. The biggest change is in the UI because, unless you get creative with naming (as suggested), there's only a single dropdown (when you'd now need 2; by group name, then version). I assumed thee would be v1 and v2 swagger docs and both have an session group / endpoint operation. @tjmcnaboe @mattmazzola Depending on the IApiDescriptionProvider.Order that your implementation runs, this should work and will be the simplest to do. It's completely up to you whether you want to live within its intrinsic, out-of-the-box limitations or extend it, which may involve forking the UI. To provide you with more context, I'm trying to split my swagger into different groups, each one with its own versions, like this: Totally reasonable. It does give us some ideas although we're not quite sure how to take action on them. CS to add. Trending is based off of the highest score sort and falls back to it if no posts are trending. Net core example explanation rabbitmq, application. At this point, we can group the interface documents and display them in groups. If we do need to generate individual files then yes, I think we would need 2 dropdowns (1 per hierarchy). As such, most OpenAPI generators such as Swashbuckle or NSwag will have parity with that. yes it will work but one major drawback is, whenever you will create a new contract you must add one new block in the category filter class in swagger. Then we need to mark the version of the swagger document on our controller. To clarify, when you use the API Explorer extensions provided by API versioning, you would end up with a Swagger document per API version that contains all applicable APIs. Listing API Methods Under Multiple Groups, Design patterns for asynchronous API communication.

How would we go about modifying Swashbuckle to have these 2 dropdowns using our second custom attribute? I would rather apply it to the class itself: You can now choose to sort by Trending, which boosts votes that have happened recently, helping to surface more up-to-date answers. I'm also curious, according to your suggestion of not splitting API versions by Status, what would happen if I set Public V1 as deprecated? I suppose this could be more common since as you include more and more classes in your solution you might be likely to have type name conflicts. Currently, the API Versioning implementation will overwrite ApiDescription.GroupName with the formatted API version (changing in the future). Well occasionally send you account related emails. gtag('js', new Date()); /api/v3.0/authoring/Orders/5. How do I get Swagger+Swashbuckle to show endpoints? SitemapAbout DevelopPaperPrivacy PolicyContact Us, . Since you're versioning by URL segment (the least RESTful method), it's technically possible for this work, but it don't think it would go far in helping clients review and test out APIs since you'd see the same name multiple times or names like Sessions 1.0 and Sessions 2.0 (unless you don't mind that). Sign in ..but it's too slow and resource consuming @karpediemnow I'm not aware of any specific issues.

We wanted to add a new version (2.0) to the app to change the urls to more closely align with the Microsoft REST guidelines and wanted to set it up in a scalable way based on the sample https://github.com/microsoft/aspnet-api-versioning/tree/master/samples/aspnetcore/SwaggerSample You are currently added a document per API version. Unless the ASP.NET team changes that, there's no way around it. to your account. If we change group name to be generic ''v'VVV" it means we can no longer use the split the actions/operations between the groups using the [ApiExplorerSettings(GroupName = "session")] attribute since it is one group per version. Since I'm running this project alone, I keep the issues list well-pruned.

Hide the interface, only the internal developer knows. Thank you @commonsensesoftware , I'm going to take a look on that link. Which would map to the ApiVersion / GroupName as those would be in alignment. The API version values have to match up. Thanks. Already on GitHub? Lvgl directory structure As can [], Copyright 2019 Develop Paper All Rights Reserved There were two main parts I was confused about. I don't profess to be an expert in Swagger (the doc or UI) nor any of the numerous frameworks that exist out there. you'd see the same name multiple times or names like Sessions 1.0 and Sessions 2.0. I'd appreciate your feedback, if any concerns, etc. The answer given by @venerik got me close to the solution. May that be of use to you. API Versioning collates by API version by default for your convenience and due to this limitation, but it doesn't have to. Modify the ConfigureServices method in Startup. As I mentioned before, the only other way I can think of that would address that is combining the API name with the API version into a single level of grouping. Adding Authorization Request in swaggerUI, New HttpHeaderOperationFilter operation filter, inheritanceSwashbuckle.AspNetCore.SwaggerGen.IOperationFilterInterface, Implementation of Apply Method, Then modify the ConfigureServices method in Startup. superb!! I will have to look into this more. For now, it's something you publicly advertise or negotiate with your clients. I do not have experience with ASP.NET Core (yet) but in ASP.NET Web API you can achieve this with the SwaggerOperationAttribute. We did this by using the group name: and then manually generating matching swagger files. I've debugging both places I see it iterate through the Api version and both seem to be fine, but only the first authoring-v1.0 file is generated at http://localhost:37936/swagger/authoring-v1.0/swagger.json. There is a simple solution which use full type name:

It seems option 1 didn't solve the issue (at least how we interpreted it, details below) and option 2 was likely too much custom work which we're resistant to invest in since we don't know it will work. Are you saying it's possible for us to only generate 1 document per version (instead of sub split by author and session) and then somehow filter on APIM so it only sees a subset of the operations? How to write, Answer for Two lists, how to judge whether the elements in a exist in the elements of B. Sorry, I should have responding earlier. This is more likely for us to try. Thank you for your support to developpaer. In the OnExecuted method, you'll be at the end with everything collated by API version. I've tried to use this solution but I get a 404 Not Found when navigating to /api/v3.0/session/Orders/5. It sounds like we would need to customize the generation of Swagger files through modifying Swashbuckle and I'm not familiar with that process. This is the kind of thing where a feature could be used based on the incoming request, but this API doesn't have a way to access the incoming request. It seems Swagger/Swashbuckle was using group name to associate operations and generate files. Thanks for replying. The mapping ends up looking something Authoring 1.0 -> ~/authoring.v1.json. @pfaustinopt I can't really speak to whether that solution works as it doesn't have a full repro. So the above will create not only the version subgroups, but the version only groups as well. I used the version to link to IApiVersionDescriptionProvider. Nevermind, it was due to this in SubgroupDescriptionProvider: How to support multiple swagger files per version/group? We feel a bit stuck. It should be simple enough to group and build endpoint URLs by API version and billing name, but you'll need two dropdown lists to drive it. The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: Most Swagger generations, at least all the ones I've seen, provide a single hierarchy in the user interface. CS, Create Hidden ApiFilter Inheritance for API Hidden FilterSwashbuckle.AspNetCore.SwaggerGen.IDocumentFilterInterface, Implementation of Apply Method. But instead of a [SwaggerOperation] attribute, what I needed was a [SwaggerOperationFilter], like this: Then I just decorate my actions as needed: As a consequence, the "Addresses" category completely disappeared from my Swagger UI (good!) We considered this but agree Version as top level is better for us. : options.GroupNameFormat = "'v'VVV"; Also, I think we're more concern about the generation of the files and not simply being able view them in the UI. It appears that the suggestions provided helped you find a solution or you used another approach. opt.GroupNameFormat = "S-'v'VV"; CS to add multiple swagger documents, Modify the Configure method in Startup. instead of that i would like to use [SwaggerOperation(Tags = new []{"Subscribers", "Organizations"})] attribute. The choice is yours. We want the version -> group hierarchy (meaning each version has authoring and session groups within it as shown in sample URLs in my post above), however, in the default implementation there is no hierarchy. How do I get ASP.NET Web API to return JSON instead of XML using Chrome? APIs that follow the REST constraints aren't able to fit into this model because Swagger does not allow duplicate URLs. I thought this was expected.

If you weren't able to solve your issue, feel free to come back or reopen the issue. Wouldn't it affect the remaining V1's from the other groups? The specific issue you've referenced appears to be related to having an action parameter of System.Type. Net core. function gtag(){dataLayer.push(arguments);} It should be simple enough to group and build endpoint URLs by API version and billing name, but you'll need two dropdown lists to drive it. Glad you got it working. /api/v3.0/session/Orders/5 By clicking Post Your Answer, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy. Seems reasonable to me. That will enable configuring options.SwaggerDoc after DI resolution. With all of this in place, you'll end up with single Swagger dropdown that looks something like: I don't know if that's what you really want, but those are the only two ways I can think of you can make this work without doing some significant customization. Each item in the dropdown corresponds to a GroupName and each group typically corresponds to a single API version. With those changes applied, this is what I get now in Swagger: All my groups are together in one Swagger definition, which is not what I intend to. I'm considering adding expanded support in the future which will jive with RFC 8594. This will not get you exactly what you want but might be close enough for your needs with a very minimal amount of effort. I've implemented the IApiDescriptionProvider you provided in your stackoverflow example. Did this help or otherwise answer your question? There would be a top level dropdown for version which exists now. The support provided in the API Explorer affords creating a group per logical name for an API. Or do we have to modify their source something more challenging? @venerik got me on the right path. Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers. We were also worried about going non-standard and being compatible with other teams services so they could overlap the maintenance. so in other words you must make changes in 2 different project. Also, for a more complete story of what I'm trying to do - I have a separate SO post.

The Swagger UI is meant to serve the 80%, but it sounds like you might be in the 20%. I have some familiarity with Swashbuckle and its author. How to configure MultipleApiVersions in Swashbuckle using aspnet ApiVersioning, How to enable CORS in ASP.net Core WebAPI. Find centralized, trusted content and collaborate around the technologies you use most. If you followed a similar pattern for the group name, then you'd be able to implement this fairly easily. "SESSION-v3.0 | AUTHORITY-v3.0" It should be possible to use a custom Swagger document generator or operation filter in Swashbuckle to achieve a similar result. Some folks within Microsoft built their own UI so that's always an option for you too. These different operations needed to be billed and managed differently (throttling, quota, etc). For instance, the next piece of code adds the tags Subscribers and Organizations: Swagger-UI groups operations by tag, so, GetAddress will get listed under both Subscribers and Organizations. example would still be appreciated. Use the built-in group name metadata - as in [ApiExplorerSettings(GroupName = "Mobile")] applied to your controller. The type of advanced customization you seem to be describing isn't unheard of. Perfect! After that I assume they either fixed their issue, found another solution, or abandoned things altogether. Things seem to work nicely. The Api Version attribute forces you to use a int for the 1st and 2nd values however for the 3rd you can use alphanumeric so then you can do this: I think you may be asking about how aggregation works. would it be possible to get Subscribers and Organizations from any json or text file? If even one is not, then the version is not deprecated. Create a custom hiding feature Hidden ApiAttribute. This does produce what we want, but due to extra complexity we're not sure. Any idea why? Once an API is completely unsupported, it simply no longer exists.

If your uploading the document to APIM, then you shouldn't have to worry about that. I didn't understand what scenario or conditions would make this occur.

I expect you'll find that with or without this extension. If there was some sample we could compare and reference as we try that could work, but we haven't tried this. Besides IApiDescriptionGroupCollectionProvider I also injected IApiVersionDescriptionProvider and used descriptionGroup.Items[0].GetApiVersion() to get the version for each group. Part of the reason that the Conventions API exists is so that you can apply versioning to external controllers that you didn't author and don't have source for. In Startup.cs change options group format to this if it is not already. My problem is, that app.UseSwaggerUI and options.SwaggerDoc are called before the SubgroupDescriptionProvider, so the IApiVersionDescriptionProvider doesn't knows yet about the new GroupNames. There seems to be confusion about the default implementation and what we want. The URL path is the identifier (not 42 as some people think). { Keeping the group name completely separate with a piece of metadata, such as an attribute, would potentially make that way easier. I'm trying to do something similar and this looks like a great solution for us, thanks @tjmcnaboe! Site design / logo 2022 Stack Exchange Inc; user contributions licensed under CC BY-SA. No problem. I've not played with that mechanism before. There's nothing wrong with creating a single document per API, per version, but I believe you'd have to generate that yourself. We have existing Asp.net core service that was using hard coded url versioning such as [Route("api/v1/app")]. (v1 / authoring, v1 / session, v2 / authoring, v2 / session, etc) If the above question about filtering is possible then maybe this isn't needed. Grouping by name is not a requirement of a Swagger/OpenAPI document. options.CustomSchemaIds(x => x.FullName); https://stackoverflow.com/questions/46071513/swagger-error-conflicting-schemaids-duplicate-schemaids-detected-for-types-a-a, But that can get really long names, so there other solution to use name of attribute on the type.

If we can give APIM a swagger file and a filter on which operations from that file, this would work and remove need for separate files. Implementing a net-core Web API That Returns Previous Response, Multiple HttpPost methods in controller prevents swagger .json generation. I don't have an example of exactly how and where you do it, but it should be possible for the entire document or specific operations.

First, you probably want IApiDescriptionGroupCollectionProvider instead of IApiVersionDescriptionProvider for your case. Because when we use swagger instead of interface, some interfaces will inevitably be exposed intuitively. v1 and v2 are not endpoints. Thanks for contributing an answer to Stack Overflow! Out original intention was to use as is, but this results in authoring and session API's for the same version in the same swagger file. You should be able to extend and replace the default implementation without a lot of effort. How do you handle IP addressing at a DR Site, Skipping a calculus topic (squeeze theorem), Is there a way to generate energy using a planet's angular momentum. The second drop down would be for the billing group of authoring and session. I would also argue that that is an abuse of how status is intended to be used, even if it does work. /api/v3-session/Orders/{id}, which is very close to what you prob want which is this api/session-v3. It doesn't convey any particular policy; for example, after 6 months. opt.SubstituteApiVersionInUrl = true; That is a much larger work than we thought as we have to re-architect to share resources across them and thus creating this issue asking for help. If you've already got a custom IApiDescriptionProvider doing what you want, then there are 2 possible solutions. Rabbitmq high availability cluster construction, . You can use a single project or many. "I didn't understand what scenario or conditions would make this occur". In your particular case, you have two hierarchical levels. Routes: If you only need a particular layout for APIM, then you might consider using the Swagger/OpenAPI library of choice and generating the *.json files yourself. But it is not shown in the interface document. It's similar to your list above with the second level of hierarchy.