Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Intent resolution data clarification #219

Closed
pgn-vole opened this issue Jun 30, 2020 · 4 comments
Closed

Intent resolution data clarification #219

pgn-vole opened this issue Jun 30, 2020 · 4 comments

Comments

@pgn-vole
Copy link

Question Area

[ ] App Directory
[x] API
[x] Context Data
[x] Intents
[ ] Use Cases
[ ] Other

Question

Referring to the API specification, an intent resolution may contain a payload attached to it. This piece of data, as far as I understand, would have been computed by the handler of that intent.
Reference:
https://fdc3.finos.org/docs/1.0/api/api-spec#resolution-object

However, looking at the specification of Intent listener it is not clear to me how does one Intent handler actual does provide this payload back.
Reference:
https://fdc3.finos.org/docs/1.0/api/DesktopAgent#addintentlistener

//Stage order intent handler impl

fdc3.addIntentListener('StageOrder', () =>{
  const order = doStageOrder()
  // How do I provide it back? 
})

Could you please clarify that area?

@rikoe
Copy link
Contributor

rikoe commented Jun 30, 2020

This is an outstanding bug in the API that will be addressed by the upcoming 1.2 release. It is not currently possible to return data with the API as is. See #201 and #127 and #155.

We discussed this at our standards working group meeting last week, in fact.

@pgn-vole
Copy link
Author

Good to hear that it is looked at! Is there a draft spec of the 1.2 version which is publicly available ?

@rikoe
Copy link
Contributor

rikoe commented Jul 1, 2020

Nope, it is relatively early on in the process. See #201 for a recent straw man proposal about how this could work. Please join in on the discussion, and attend our standard working group meetings!

@rikoe
Copy link
Contributor

rikoe commented Jul 10, 2020

Closing in favour of #201

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants