[Bug]: Coordinate the infographics main screen with the newsflash list

[MichalOren]

Describe the bug
There is a mismatch between the infographics screen and the news flash list on the right.
The problem exists in several flows, therefore it is described in general terms.

To Reproduce
https://anyway-infographics-staging.web.app/newsflash/184863

Expected behavior

[SejoB]

@atalyaalon

Today api haven't indication about pagination. Api receive only offset and limit.

To achieve this feature we need to add full pagination control to api request.

As well in this case we need bi direction pagination.

api params to add:

• pageNumber
• pageSize
• newsFlashId

api response should include:

data: [] pagination :{ pageNumber: number; pageSize: number; totalPages: number; totalRecords: number; }

[ziv17]

Hi @SejoB ,
I will be implementing this on the back-end. I have a question:
What should be the behavior when newsFlashId parameter that you mentioned is provided? Is it mutually disjoint from pageNumber and pageSize?
Thanks, Ziv

[ziv17]

Hi @SejoB ,
For the integration, I can output the new format only when pageNumber is provided, and only on second step to remove the current output format completely.
What do you think?

[atalyaalon]

Hi @SejoB , I will be implementing this on the back-end. I have a question: What should be the behavior when newsFlashId parameter that you mentioned is provided? Is it mutually disjoint from pageNumber and pageSize? Thanks, Ziv

@ziv17 from my understanding, when newsFlashId parameter is provided together with and limit (and optional pageNumber and pageSize), ideal behavior is sending news flashes that are chronologically before and after this newsflash (say if limit is 100, so we'll get 50 newsflashes before and 49 newsflashes after specific newsflash - or less if there are less). Meaning that to some extent newsFlashId sets the offset in this case, and seems like these two parameters cannot co-exist.

@SejoB @ziv17 What do you think?

[atalyaalon]

Hi @SejoB , For the integration, I can output the new format only when pageNumber is provided, and only on second step to remove the current output format completely. What do you think?

Sounds good to me

[atalyaalon]

@ziv17 Just to make sure we're aligned with current functionality (that will either be changed or deprecated if we'll use newsFlashId as a parameter):
Today when fetching specific news flash id, it's not a parameter but a part of the main URL for example:
https://www.anyway.co.il/api/news-flash/214463

And there is no option to fetch additional newsflashes using limit.
We'll get the same response when using this URL as well:
https://www.anyway.co.il/api/news-flash/214463?limit=100

[ziv17]

Hi @SejoB , @atalyaalon
I will try to sum it up:
Transition period, I.e. both old and new format are supported.

1. If both parameters pageNumber, nor newsFlashId are not provided, the current output format is used.
2. Parameters pageNumber and newsFlashId are disjoint, I.e. will not appear both in same request.
3. When one of pageNumber or newsFlashId appear, the new format (aka pagination) will be used for output.
4. pageNumber is not mandatory. It has a default of 0 (zero).
5. pageSize is not mandatory. It has a default of 50 (Do we want a different default?)
6. When pageNumber parameter is provided, the items of that page will be returned. The total number of items will be counted according to the filter parameters in the request.
7. When newsFlashId is provided:
   a) The offset of the item with the given id will be calculated. Output sorted ascending by Id, and using the provided filter fields.
   b) The items that will be returned correspond to using
   offset: given Id item offset – (total items /(2 * pageSize)) (of course, max between that value and 0)
   pageSize

After the transition period, the current out format, and the parameters offset and limit will not be supported.

[atalyaalon]

1-4 OK
5. I think that right now we're using in FE request 100 newsflashes every time (limit=100). Perhaps we can keep this as default pageSize? Or even increase it?
6. OK
7. Can you give an example for this formula explaining the logic?

@ziv17 all in all looks good. Please make sure performance stays the same with these changes (for example, when adding calculations like 7a).
@SejoB what do you think?