Minor Refactorings about bibserver HOT 4 CLOSED

How close are we to closing this?

2 is done, 4 is wontchange, 5 is probably done

@markmacgillivray: can you comment on 5 and whether we do 3 (i'm still +1 on this!) and whether we do 1 (i'm also +1 on that!)

from bibserver.

5 is done, have totally changed the way the vars are passed through to the backend now.

3 - I find useful, it is also present in the old bibserver, and at the moment Jim is wanting a reproduction of previous functionality. Why get rid when it is already there? Adds about 5 lines of complexity.

1 - the search endpoint may need to be defined differently anyway if we are going to use ES types. I am uncertain of the point of /api/search instead of /query.

from bibserver.

@markmacgillivray: /query vs /api/search is obviously trivial it is just a mental model clarification (this is part of the API not part of the WUI) and would fit with a general API (I anticipate having /api/collection, /api/record etc at some point -- distinct from the .json / content negotiation stuff).

However, if you want to be wontfix on that I'm happy to live with that :-) (and we can lose this issue!)

from bibserver.

Closing since leaving /query for the present.

from bibserver.