Skip to content

Conversation

toumorokoshi
Copy link
Member

@toumorokoshi toumorokoshi commented Sep 7, 2025

The previous guidance was ambiguous about when to use a full resource name vs a relative one.

This ambiguity makes it difficult for clients to read the location of the remote resource, as well as the ablity to resolve it as necessary.

Some forms of REST APIs already put the full resource name directly in the payload, so there is precedence for this approach.

Clarifying the guidance to ensure consistent behavior for APIs.

fixes #264

🍱 Types of changes

What types of changes does your code introduce to AEP? Put an x in the boxes
that apply

  • Enhancement
  • New proposal
  • Migrated from google.aip.dev
  • Chore / Quick Fix

📋 Your checklist for this pull request

Please review the AEP Style and Guidance for
contributing to this repository.

General

💝 Thank you!

The previous guidance was ambiguous about when to use a full
resource name vs a relative one. 

This ambiguity makes it difficult for clients to read the location of 
the remote resource, as well as the ablity to resolve it as necessary.

Some forms of REST APIs already put the full resource name directly in the 
payload, so there is precedence for this approach.

Clarifying the guidance to ensure consistent behavior for APIs.
@toumorokoshi toumorokoshi added the discussion changes that require discussion, and will likely be discussed in the weekly meeting. label Sep 11, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
discussion changes that require discussion, and will likely be discussed in the weekly meeting.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

AEP-122: make full resource paths always require the domain
1 participant