Search resource implementation

[carlespibernat]

Hello!

I want to create a searcher in my project which searches and gives results of different resources.

I suppose that the most "RESTful" way to do that is to create a search resource, so what I have done is create my own Search entity. Then i have created a SearchItemDataProvider that will get the filters from the request and will find the results and return them.

The problem that I have now is that api platform requires that my resource has a specific id for each search, so I get an error.

Is this the properly way to implement this? And if it is how can I solve my issue with the id?

Thanks!

[soyuka]

What I'd do in your case would be to implement a custom Search filter (extends the Abstractfilter). Then you declare the filter on each resource you want to filter.
If you want the search results to behave differently form your normal collections (ie different groups) you can easily declare a /resource/search collection operation.

I'm not sure that you'd need a custom data provider though!

[teohhanhui]

What I'd do in your case would be to implement a custom Search filter (extends the Abstractfilter). Then you declare the filter on each resource you want to filter.

No, that wouldn't work as what's being asked for is a search resource that aggregates other resources.

[teohhanhui]

I think a major blocker for this kind of use case is the lack of support for blank nodes: https://json-ld.org/spec/latest/json-ld/#identifying-blank-nodes

[carlespibernat]

No, that wouldn't work as what's being asked for is a search resource that aggregates other resources.

You're right @teohhanhui.

What I said was inspired by this stackoverflow post answer.

[teohhanhui]

Yes, I think that's a good pattern. We should aim to support it.

[soyuka]

No, that wouldn't work as what's being asked for is a search resource that aggregates other resources.

Okay I misunderstood the question then :D.
@teohhanhui we already have an issue open for blank nodes no? Maybe time to dig into this...

[carlespibernat]

Then it's not possible to do this for the moment?

[teohhanhui]

@carlespibernat I don't think it's impossible, but it's harder.