Change Details

In my opinion, `detail` and `detailHTML` in the wbcheckconstraints API response are a relic from another time. Now that constraints are configured in statements (in a consistent and easily consumable format, not wikitext templates) and violation messages carry all the information you need to understand the violation, I see no need to include them in the API response – the gadget already ignores them. It looks like this can reduce the response size by about 38% (P6321), which matters not only for what we transfer over the network, but also for what we store in the cache – so I would like to kick this out before we deploy {T179849}. As this is a breaking change, it will need another announcement. I’ll send the announcement on Monday, 20 November 2017, and then we can remove it on Monday, 18 December 2017.

In my opinion, `detail` and `detailHTML` in the wbcheckconstraints API response are a relic from another time. Now that constraints are configured in statements (in a consistent and easily consumable format, not wikitext templates) and violation messages carry all the information you need to understand the violation, I see no need to include them in the API response – the gadget already ignores them. It looks like this can reduce the response size by about 38% (P6321), which matters not only for what we transfer over the network, but also for what we store in the cache – so I would like to kick this out before we deploy {T179849}. The announcement for this breaking change was sent on Monday, 20 November 2017, stating that the change will take effect on Monday, 18 December 2017.

In my opinion, `detail` and `detailHTML` in the wbcheckconstraints API response are a relic from another time. Now that constraints are configured in statements (in a consistent and easily consumable format, not wikitext templates) and violation messages carry all the information you need to understand the violation, I see no need to include them in the API response – the gadget already ignores them. It looks like this can reduce the response size by about 38% (P6321), which matters not only for what we transfer over the network, but also for what we store in the cache – so I would like to kick this out before we deploy {T179849}. As this is a breaking change, it will need another announcement. I’ll send the announcemThe announcement for this breaking change was sent on Monday, 20 November 2017, and then we can remove istating that the change will take effect on Monday, 18 December 2017.