Skip to content

Conversation

@magicmark
Copy link
Contributor

@magicmark magicmark commented Jan 7, 2026

cc @benjie still a wip but enough to show some progress.

I'll do my best to keep the built version of the specs updated here as a preview:

(this will not be the canonical urls of the final specs as discussed elsewhere; the goal is to publish to a *.graphql.org domain)

Question

  • Should we keep these as two seperate specifications that layer on top of each other? Or one combined specification that you can partially implement? 29c608e0 is an older version of this PR that combines them into a single spec. @limitTypes may be useful without @matches, but since they're so closely related, I could see it making sense to publish a single document. Thoughts?

@magicmark magicmark force-pushed the add_spec_for_matches branch 2 times, most recently from 3de3a0f to ea93031 Compare January 7, 2026 23:01
@magicmark magicmark force-pushed the add_spec_for_matches branch from ea93031 to 29c608e Compare January 7, 2026 23:08
TODO: handle the following case

allPetsConnection @matches {
... on ConnectionType { pageInfo { } } # Fragment on the Connection type itself
Copy link
Contributor Author

@magicmark magicmark Jan 7, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

is this worth trying to support? or should this just be rejected when using @matches? pretty edge casey...i'm inclined to say the latter.

Copy link
Member

@benjie benjie Jan 8, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think intermediate fragments should be explicitly rejected. No “spooky action at a distance” for this.

@magicmark magicmark marked this pull request as ready for review January 7, 2026 23:11
@magicmark magicmark force-pushed the add_spec_for_matches branch from 6d0f276 to a5f00ff Compare January 8, 2026 07:10
@magicmark magicmark force-pushed the add_spec_for_matches branch from a5f00ff to 513cab0 Compare January 8, 2026 07:34
@benjie benjie merged commit a7ca6b3 into graphql:main Jan 8, 2026
2 checks passed
@benjie
Copy link
Member

benjie commented Jan 8, 2026

I’m unsure if separate or same spec makes sense. Maybe same since you want to encourage adoption of both together?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants