issue_comments
6 rows where author_association = "OWNER" and "created_at" is on date 2021-12-14
This data as json, CSV (advanced)
Suggested facets: issue_url, issue
id ▼ | html_url | issue_url | node_id | user | created_at | updated_at | author_association | body | reactions | issue | performed_via_github_app |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
993794247 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1518#issuecomment-993794247 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1518 | IC_kwDOBm6k_c47PBjH | simonw 9599 | 2021-12-14T17:09:40Z | 2021-12-14T17:09:40Z | OWNER | - `table_actions` should be an extra. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Complete refactor of TableView and table.html template 1058072543 | |
993813210 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/621#issuecomment-993813210 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/621 | IC_kwDOBm6k_c47PGLa | simonw 9599 | 2021-12-14T17:30:13Z | 2021-12-14T20:23:57Z | OWNER | Might be able to create a web form that's unambiguous using: `https://latest.datasette.io/fixtures/roadside_attractions?_through.["roadside_attraction_characteristics","characteristic_id"]=1` So: ```html <input type="text" name="_through.["roadside_attraction_characteristics","characteristic_id"]' value="1"> ``` I'm pretty confident this is allowed by the HTML specification. This works: ```html <form action="https://httpbin.org/get"> <input type="text" name='_through.["roadside_attraction_characteristics","characteristic_id"]' value="1"> <input type="submit"> </form> ``` ASGI parsing seems to work too: https://latest-with-plugins.datasette.io/-/asgi-scope?_through.[%22roadside_attraction_characteristics%22%2C%22characteristic_id%22]=1 | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field 520681725 | |
993958242 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/621#issuecomment-993958242 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/621 | IC_kwDOBm6k_c47Ppli | simonw 9599 | 2021-12-14T20:33:25Z | 2021-12-14T20:33:56Z | OWNER | Alternative idea: since current syntax is: `?_through={"table":"roadside_attraction_characteristics","column":"characteristic_id","value":"1"}` The form-encoding-friendly syntax could be: `?_through.{"table":"roadside_attraction_characteristics","column":"characteristic_id"}=1` Which is more consistent than the array proposal: `?_through.["roadside_attraction_characteristics","characteristic_id"]=1` | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field 520681725 | |
994005634 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/621#issuecomment-994005634 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/621 | IC_kwDOBm6k_c47P1KC | simonw 9599 | 2021-12-14T21:02:50Z | 2021-12-14T21:02:50Z | OWNER | This would also mean that an extra text input box could be easily shown on the page. https://latest-with-plugins.datasette.io/fixtures/roadside_attractions?_through={"table":"roadside_attraction_characteristics","column":"characteristic_id","value":"1"} but with the annotated box added (and made to look good): <img width="737" alt="image" src="https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/9599/146078853-d66e34e0-73c9-4c35-9414-5aff3bf825ee.png"> | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Syntax for ?_through= that works as a form field 520681725 | |
994042389 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1518#issuecomment-994042389 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1518 | IC_kwDOBm6k_c47P-IV | simonw 9599 | 2021-12-14T21:35:53Z | 2021-12-14T21:35:53Z | OWNER | Maybe a better way to approach this would be to focus on the JSON side of things - try to get a basic JSON version with `?_extra=` support working, then eventually build that up to the point where it can power the HTML version. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Complete refactor of TableView and table.html template 1058072543 | |
994085710 | https://github.com/simonw/datasette/issues/1518#issuecomment-994085710 | https://api.github.com/repos/simonw/datasette/issues/1518 | IC_kwDOBm6k_c47QItO | simonw 9599 | 2021-12-14T22:03:16Z | 2021-12-14T22:04:28Z | OWNER | There are actually four forms of SQL query used by the table page: - `from_sql` - just the `from table_name where ...` - `sql_no_order_no_limit` - used for faceting, `"select {select_all_columns} from {table_name} {where}"` - `sql` - the above but with order and limit clauses: `"select {select_specified_columns} from {table_name} {where}{order_by} limit {page_size}{offset}"` - `count_sql` used for the count, built out of `from_sql`: `"select count(*) {from_sql}"` I'm tempted to encapsulate those in a `Query` class. | {"total_count": 0, "+1": 0, "-1": 0, "laugh": 0, "hooray": 0, "confused": 0, "heart": 0, "rocket": 0, "eyes": 0} | Complete refactor of TableView and table.html template 1058072543 |
Advanced export
JSON shape: default, array, newline-delimited, object
CREATE TABLE [issue_comments] ( [html_url] TEXT, [issue_url] TEXT, [id] INTEGER PRIMARY KEY, [node_id] TEXT, [user] INTEGER REFERENCES [users]([id]), [created_at] TEXT, [updated_at] TEXT, [author_association] TEXT, [body] TEXT, [reactions] TEXT, [issue] INTEGER REFERENCES [issues]([id]) , [performed_via_github_app] TEXT); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_issue] ON [issue_comments] ([issue]); CREATE INDEX [idx_issue_comments_user] ON [issue_comments] ([user]);
updated_at (date) 1 ✖