diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'NorthstarDedicatedTest/include/protobuf/field_mask.proto')
| -rw-r--r-- | NorthstarDedicatedTest/include/protobuf/field_mask.proto | 245 |
1 files changed, 245 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/NorthstarDedicatedTest/include/protobuf/field_mask.proto b/NorthstarDedicatedTest/include/protobuf/field_mask.proto new file mode 100644 index 00000000..6b5104f1 --- /dev/null +++ b/NorthstarDedicatedTest/include/protobuf/field_mask.proto @@ -0,0 +1,245 @@ +// Protocol Buffers - Google's data interchange format +// Copyright 2008 Google Inc. All rights reserved. +// https://developers.google.com/protocol-buffers/ +// +// Redistribution and use in source and binary forms, with or without +// modification, are permitted provided that the following conditions are +// met: +// +// * Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright +// notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer. +// * Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above +// copyright notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer +// in the documentation and/or other materials provided with the +// distribution. +// * Neither the name of Google Inc. nor the names of its +// contributors may be used to endorse or promote products derived from +// this software without specific prior written permission. +// +// THIS SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED BY THE COPYRIGHT HOLDERS AND CONTRIBUTORS +// "AS IS" AND ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING, BUT NOT +// LIMITED TO, THE IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR +// A PARTICULAR PURPOSE ARE DISCLAIMED. IN NO EVENT SHALL THE COPYRIGHT +// OWNER OR CONTRIBUTORS BE LIABLE FOR ANY DIRECT, INDIRECT, INCIDENTAL, +// SPECIAL, EXEMPLARY, OR CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES (INCLUDING, BUT NOT +// LIMITED TO, PROCUREMENT OF SUBSTITUTE GOODS OR SERVICES; LOSS OF USE, +// DATA, OR PROFITS; OR BUSINESS INTERRUPTION) HOWEVER CAUSED AND ON ANY +// THEORY OF LIABILITY, WHETHER IN CONTRACT, STRICT LIABILITY, OR TORT +// (INCLUDING NEGLIGENCE OR OTHERWISE) ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF THE USE +// OF THIS SOFTWARE, EVEN IF ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE. + +syntax = "proto3"; + +package google.protobuf; + +option csharp_namespace = "Google.Protobuf.WellKnownTypes"; +option java_package = "com.google.protobuf"; +option java_outer_classname = "FieldMaskProto"; +option java_multiple_files = true; +option objc_class_prefix = "GPB"; +option go_package = "google.golang.org/protobuf/types/known/fieldmaskpb"; +option cc_enable_arenas = true; + +// `FieldMask` represents a set of symbolic field paths, for example: +// +// paths: "f.a" +// paths: "f.b.d" +// +// Here `f` represents a field in some root message, `a` and `b` +// fields in the message found in `f`, and `d` a field found in the +// message in `f.b`. +// +// Field masks are used to specify a subset of fields that should be +// returned by a get operation or modified by an update operation. +// Field masks also have a custom JSON encoding (see below). +// +// # Field Masks in Projections +// +// When used in the context of a projection, a response message or +// sub-message is filtered by the API to only contain those fields as +// specified in the mask. For example, if the mask in the previous +// example is applied to a response message as follows: +// +// f { +// a : 22 +// b { +// d : 1 +// x : 2 +// } +// y : 13 +// } +// z: 8 +// +// The result will not contain specific values for fields x,y and z +// (their value will be set to the default, and omitted in proto text +// output): +// +// +// f { +// a : 22 +// b { +// d : 1 +// } +// } +// +// A repeated field is not allowed except at the last position of a +// paths string. +// +// If a FieldMask object is not present in a get operation, the +// operation applies to all fields (as if a FieldMask of all fields +// had been specified). +// +// Note that a field mask does not necessarily apply to the +// top-level response message. In case of a REST get operation, the +// field mask applies directly to the response, but in case of a REST +// list operation, the mask instead applies to each individual message +// in the returned resource list. In case of a REST custom method, +// other definitions may be used. Where the mask applies will be +// clearly documented together with its declaration in the API. In +// any case, the effect on the returned resource/resources is required +// behavior for APIs. +// +// # Field Masks in Update Operations +// +// A field mask in update operations specifies which fields of the +// targeted resource are going to be updated. The API is required +// to only change the values of the fields as specified in the mask +// and leave the others untouched. If a resource is passed in to +// describe the updated values, the API ignores the values of all +// fields not covered by the mask. +// +// If a repeated field is specified for an update operation, new values will +// be appended to the existing repeated field in the target resource. Note that +// a repeated field is only allowed in the last position of a `paths` string. +// +// If a sub-message is specified in the last position of the field mask for an +// update operation, then new value will be merged into the existing sub-message +// in the target resource. +// +// For example, given the target message: +// +// f { +// b { +// d: 1 +// x: 2 +// } +// c: [1] +// } +// +// And an update message: +// +// f { +// b { +// d: 10 +// } +// c: [2] +// } +// +// then if the field mask is: +// +// paths: ["f.b", "f.c"] +// +// then the result will be: +// +// f { +// b { +// d: 10 +// x: 2 +// } +// c: [1, 2] +// } +// +// An implementation may provide options to override this default behavior for +// repeated and message fields. +// +// In order to reset a field's value to the default, the field must +// be in the mask and set to the default value in the provided resource. +// Hence, in order to reset all fields of a resource, provide a default +// instance of the resource and set all fields in the mask, or do +// not provide a mask as described below. +// +// If a field mask is not present on update, the operation applies to +// all fields (as if a field mask of all fields has been specified). +// Note that in the presence of schema evolution, this may mean that +// fields the client does not know and has therefore not filled into +// the request will be reset to their default. If this is unwanted +// behavior, a specific service may require a client to always specify +// a field mask, producing an error if not. +// +// As with get operations, the location of the resource which +// describes the updated values in the request message depends on the +// operation kind. In any case, the effect of the field mask is +// required to be honored by the API. +// +// ## Considerations for HTTP REST +// +// The HTTP kind of an update operation which uses a field mask must +// be set to PATCH instead of PUT in order to satisfy HTTP semantics +// (PUT must only be used for full updates). +// +// # JSON Encoding of Field Masks +// +// In JSON, a field mask is encoded as a single string where paths are +// separated by a comma. Fields name in each path are converted +// to/from lower-camel naming conventions. +// +// As an example, consider the following message declarations: +// +// message Profile { +// User user = 1; +// Photo photo = 2; +// } +// message User { +// string display_name = 1; +// string address = 2; +// } +// +// In proto a field mask for `Profile` may look as such: +// +// mask { +// paths: "user.display_name" +// paths: "photo" +// } +// +// In JSON, the same mask is represented as below: +// +// { +// mask: "user.displayName,photo" +// } +// +// # Field Masks and Oneof Fields +// +// Field masks treat fields in oneofs just as regular fields. Consider the +// following message: +// +// message SampleMessage { +// oneof test_oneof { +// string name = 4; +// SubMessage sub_message = 9; +// } +// } +// +// The field mask can be: +// +// mask { +// paths: "name" +// } +// +// Or: +// +// mask { +// paths: "sub_message" +// } +// +// Note that oneof type names ("test_oneof" in this case) cannot be used in +// paths. +// +// ## Field Mask Verification +// +// The implementation of any API method which has a FieldMask type field in the +// request should verify the included field paths, and return an +// `INVALID_ARGUMENT` error if any path is unmappable. +message FieldMask { + // The set of field mask paths. + repeated string paths = 1; +} |