When importing an OpenAPI JSON file into Postman, Postman won't save the API definition because there's a syntax error with the JSON:
Should not have a 'bearerformat' property without 'scheme: bearer' being set
If I change the "scheme": "Bearer" to "scheme": "bearer" (lower case B) then Postman is happy, but the schema definition says it should be "Bearer".
What I don't understand is; this problem doesn't show up in a Google search, how can I be the only one having this problem? How can Postman not like the proper casing of Bearer? Am I missing something really obvious?
The scheme value is case-insensitive, so both "scheme": "bearer" and "scheme": "Bearer" (and even "scheme": "BeArEr") are valid.
This looks like an issue with Postman. I suggest you report it to Postman's support.
As a workaround, change your definition to use lowercase "scheme": "bearer".
Related
I have a GraphQL API which works like this:
mutation {
customer(id: "123") {
someMutation(new: "data") {
id name email # from customer
}
}
}
We use nested resolver style because we have a large schema, and it helps keep things clean.
This means we need to resolve "args" from the someMutation, and inherit the ID from the parent resolver.
AWS AppSync docs claims that you can do this with the $context.source.id field, but there are so far as I can tell zero documented options. We have tried this Velocity Template:
{
"version": "2018-05-29",
"method": "POST",
"params": {
"headers": {
"Content-Type": "application/json"
},
"query": {
"command_name": "set_email",
"new": $util.toJson($context.arguments.new),
}
},
"resourcePath": $util.toJson("/customers/$context.source.id")
}
Scant little documentation exists (except this "resolver template mapping guide") about interpolation, or string concatenation, it is pretty inadequate.
According to the "Resolver mapping template context reference" $context.source should "A map that contains the resolution of the parent field."
The failure mode here is that my downstream HTTP resolver is receiving the literal string "/customers/$context.source.id" rather than the interpolated variable.
Try as I might I cannot figure a way to get an interpolated value with or without any $util...() helpers for JSONification string concatenation, any combination of quoting, etc.
So, I figured this out in the end. The parent resolver wasn't responding with the {id: '123'...} data.
I found out that AppSync has a test console, which helped me verify that, yes, indeed my VTL template was working correctly with the expected payload.
What I found incredibly unintuitive, however was that unlike most template languages which would interpolate an empty variable to "" (empty string), VTL templates seem to behave as though you had no interpolation what so ever leading me to question the interpolation syntax in general.
See the screenshot from the AppSync test console below.
There should also be a way to write tests in that use the AWS CLI/SDK but I didn't bother looking into it, ergonomics are bad for that, needing us to configure the CI with a test account on AWS, and we test our application logic at a higher level, anyway.
I am training a model using Google's Document AI. The training fails with the following error (I have included only a part of the JSON file for simplicity but the error is identical for all documents in my dataset):
"trainingDatasetValidation": {
"documentErrors": [
{
"code": 3,
"message": "Invalid document.",
"details": [
{
"#type": "type.googleapis.com/google.rpc.ErrorInfo",
"reason": "INVALID_DOCUMENT",
"domain": "documentai.googleapis.com",
"metadata": {
"num_fields": "0",
"num_fields_needed": "1",
"document": "5e88c5e4cc05ddb8.json",
"annotation_name": "INCOME_ADJUSTMENTS",
"field_name": "entities.text_anchor.text_segments"
}
}
]
}
What I understand from this error is that the model expects the field INCOME_ADJUSTMENTS to appear (at least) once in the document but instead, it finds zero instances of it.
That would have been understandable except I have already defined the field INCOME_ADJUSTMENTS in my schema as "Optional Once", i.e., this field can appear either zero or one time.
Am I missing something? Why does this error persist despite the fact that it is addressed in the schema?
p.s. I have also tried "Optional multiple" (and "Required once" and "Required multiple") and the error persists.
EDIT: As requested, here's what one of the JSON files looks like. Note that there is no PII here as the details (name, SSN, etc.) are synthetic data.
I have/had the same issue as you in the past and also having it right now.
What I managed to do was to get the document string from the error message and then searching for the images in the Storage bucket that has the dataset.
Then I opened the image and searched for that image in my 1000+ images dataset.
Then I deleted the bounding box for the label with the issue and then relabeled it. This seemed to solve 90%of the issues I had.
It`s a ton of manual work and I wish google thought of more when they released the Web app for Doc AI because the ML part is great but the app is really lackluster.
I would also be very happy for any other fixes
EDIT: another quicker workaround I have found is deleting the latest revision of the labeled documents from the Dataset in cloud storage. Like, take faulty document name from the operation json dump, then search for it in documents/ and then just delete latest revision.
Will probably mess up labeling and make you lose work, but it`s a quick fix to at least make some progress if you want.
Removed a few empty boxes and a lot of intersecting boxes fixed it for me.
i had the same problem.
so i deleted all my dataset and imported and re-labeled again.
then the training worked fine.
I'm not a developer, so this is a little above my head.
My team has implemented a project in dialogflow, one for an old app and one from a new app. I have basic access to the old dialogflow account and I can see that it has an intent called glossaries, same intent name as in the new one. In glossaries, there is a training phrase called "What is a red talk?". This phrase only works in one of my apps and I need to know why.
There is no default response or anything under context. If I copy that curl link into a terminal, the payload doesn't return with any information.
I found the API for the new app and red talks is definitely not in the payload when I do a GET/all. There may be an old API somewhere, but no one knows where.
Where can I find this information? I'm very confused and all the basic training for dialogflow points to default response, which we're not using. I have read through the docs. I have searched the three company github repos that have the application in the name but I have not found anything. I am looking for an app.intent phrase with glossaries in it or just the word glossaries.
I have found only this json and a glossaryTest.php that doesn't seem helpful:
"meta": {
"total": 2,
"page": 1,
"limit": 10,
"sort": "createdAt",
"direction": "desc",
"load-more": false
},
"results": [
{
"term": "This is a term",
"definition": "This is a definition",
"links": [
{
"id": "1",
"url": "http:\/\/example.com\/1",
"title": "KWU Course: Lead Generation 36:12:3",
"ordering": "1"
},
{
"id": "2",
"url": "http:\/\/example.com\/2",
"title": "",
"ordering": "2"
}
]
}
]
}
There is also a json with a lot data for API calls but no glossaries there either.
If we're using fulfillment to handle these intents, I don't see a fullfillment header like google docs say there should be. I may not have full access so perhaps I would be viewing more information in the screen if I had that, I have no idea. The devs who created this are long gone. The devs who also created the new app are also long gone.
Am I missing an API in my environment documentation? Is the intent hard coded? I suspect it was. How do I prove that or move forward?
Yes, your intent are somehow hard-coded [0], or defined through the UI.
Each intent has a setting to enable fulfillment. If an intent requires
some action by your system or a dynamic response, you should enable
fulfillment for the intent. If an intent without fulfillment enabled
is matched, Dialogflow uses the static response you defined for the
intent. [2]
Perhaps you are using a custom integration [1]. So, unless you are using static response (those you see in the UI), the frontend code may be managed by your project API (not Dialogflow API), and perhaps the content modified before performing any further or eventually returning the response.
As I understand you should contact your colleagues for understanding about the integration solution they have created. Or otherwise if the Intent has been created through the API, look for its relative files where there may be They may have created the integration through the SDK, while picking up training data from a source out of the codebase. So perhaps you cannot see it directly in the code. Nonetheless, you should be able to access it through the UI once it has been created.
In case my answer was not of your help, please do not hesitate to further clarify your needs, perhaps providing some further information.
[0] https://cloud.google.com/dialogflow/docs/manage-intents#create_intent
[1] https://cloud.google.com/dialogflow/docs/integrations
[2] https://cloud.google.com/dialogflow/docs/fulfillment-overview
I work with a system that requires that each change be audited and a reason specified for each change. In trying to keep with good REST design, we want to use the HTTP verbs correctly.
With regards to this particular case, I am unsure about best way to handle this situation. Lets say we have a simple entity:
URL: /users/100
JSON: { username: 'usr1', firstName: 'John', lastName: 'Smith' }
Now if I want to update the username from 'usr1' to 'user1', our system requires that I specify the reason for the change.
Without the change reason requirement, we could easily just PUT the JSON to the URL.
My question is what is the best way to send the change reason to the server. Here are the options I have come up with so far:
Add a changeReason attribute to the entity.
Add changeReason as a query parameter.
Add a changeReason header.
None of these options seem right to me. Has anyone dealt with this before?
First, some thoughts to your proposed solutions:
Add changeReason to the JSON object: Is bad, because (if using the same mime-type) the GET would not need that field.
As query parameter: Is wrong, because it is not a parameter for the resource (but for the request)
As header: Is wrong, because this is an out-of-band information.
So, certainly this information should be part of the request representation, and the update happens on the user, so the URL should not change (it is the same resource). I propose the PATCH method, which was created seemingly for the exact purpose you describe.
With the PATCH method, you have to describe a "change" representation, that specifically describes a change you want applied to a resource. This document format will be different from any resource formats, and could then contain a "changeReason". Looks something like this:
PATCH /users/100
Content-Type: application/vnd.company.auditedchange+json
{
"replaceFields": {
"username": "user1"
}
"changeReason": "Typo in username."
}
Introduce a new resource userchange. POST to it with the information about the change.
POST /userchange
Content-Type: application/json
{
"id": 100,
"changes": {
"username": "user1"
},
"reason": "fixed name"
}
The server would execute the change on the user and log the reason.
I am using Ember Data RestSerializer to POST to a 3rd-party API.
The JSON payload format that the API expects is:
[{"key": "value"}]
But all the normalization methods I find, like serializeIntoHash, seem to address the inner part of the payload:
{
"modelName": [{"key": "value"}]
}
Is there a way to get rid of the root object and root key?
When you're dealing with questions of [your store] -> [persistence layer], you usually are talking about the Adapter (not the Serializer).
I think adapter#createRecord is what you want to override.