You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Restful Search API is awesome and it works great with straightforward term facets. But I've had trouble with other type of facets, namely Date Facets: https://www.drupal.org/project/date_facets
Date Facets implements its own FacetAPI QueryType that checks FacetapiAdapter::getActiveItems() to determine how to map user configurable "terms" (like "future" or "two-weeks-ago") to date ranges.
Because FacetapiAdapter::processActiveItems() ultimately looks at the URL through FacetAPI's default URL Processor plug-in and this module uses a different query parameter and format, FacetapiAdapter::getActiveItems() is never correct.
Perhaps this module should implement its own FacetAPI URL Processor plug-in instead of parsing the URL itself and manipulating the Search API conditions directly? Alternatively, simply using the gross ?f[0]=... format instead of the much nicer ?filter[name][value]=... seems to work.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Restful Search API is awesome and it works great with straightforward term facets. But I've had trouble with other type of facets, namely Date Facets: https://www.drupal.org/project/date_facets
Date Facets implements its own FacetAPI QueryType that checks FacetapiAdapter::getActiveItems() to determine how to map user configurable "terms" (like "future" or "two-weeks-ago") to date ranges.
Because FacetapiAdapter::processActiveItems() ultimately looks at the URL through FacetAPI's default URL Processor plug-in and this module uses a different query parameter and format, FacetapiAdapter::getActiveItems() is never correct.
Perhaps this module should implement its own FacetAPI URL Processor plug-in instead of parsing the URL itself and manipulating the Search API conditions directly? Alternatively, simply using the gross ?f[0]=... format instead of the much nicer ?filter[name][value]=... seems to work.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: