Skip to content

Conversation

phryneas
Copy link
Contributor

This might be a déjà vu for some, but I want to give this another try.

Note that this is different from the @key and @lookup directives in the Composite Schemas Spec as I also want to solve this problem for non-schema-aware clients, so while those directives are amazing for federation, they cannot help us solve the use case I'm laying out here.

Those two proposals are more complementary than conflicting in my eyes.

Copy link
Member

@benjie benjie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

RFC documents get merged without review.

@benjie benjie merged commit f30bf35 into graphql:main Oct 15, 2025
2 checks passed
@martinbonnin
Copy link
Contributor

Might be worth having a matching tracking issue at https://github.com/graphql/graphql-spec/issues/?

@martinbonnin
Copy link
Contributor

Also suggestion to rename to __id meta-field to make it more distinguishable from the other object identification proposals.

@phryneas
Copy link
Contributor Author

Opened a tracking issue here: graphql/graphql-spec#1198

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.

3 participants