graphql-wg VS graphql-spec

I'm using the Example from the DeferStream RFC

The client-side tree as proposed by other posters is what I would do in GraphQL currently; but I did want to mention the Struct RFC which may or may not address this problem depending on if your department/etc link to other GraphQL types you might want to query that should not be represented as structs.

Every aspect of languages and specifications are created with context of an end user human. The specification is a project by the Joint Development Foundation, with a current Working Group charter that includes the IP policy governing all working group deliverables (i.e. new features, changes of spec, source code, and datasets, etc). To join the Working Group there are details for membership and details in the agreement for joining the efforts of the group.

GraphQL Foundation maintains specification http://spec.graphql.org/, documentation, tools and vendor-neutral events. GraphQL Working Group (WG) manage & - maintain specification. https://github.com/graphql/graphql-wg

GraphQL's first draft release was 8 years ago. [1]

It's first non-draft release was 5 years ago. [2]

It's first release under a community foundation was 2 years ago. [3]

[1] https://spec.graphql.org/July2015/

[2] https://github.com/graphql/graphql-spec/releases/tag/June201...

[3] https://github.com/graphql/graphql-spec/releases/tag/October...

I'm a big believer in GraphQL (in fact, at time of writing I'm #2 contributor to the GraphQL spec itself) so it pains me that a tool I built doesn't always have easy ways to achieve the "versionless schema" design that GraphQL encourages when it comes to making significant breaking changes to your underlying database tables. (Personally, I think you should aim for your database schema itself to be versionless, but this is not always possible.) Of course you can build your PostGraphile schema over views instead of tables, but views have their own problems that I won't go into here…

I created a proposal for Map type but didn’t make it through.

https://github.com/graphql/graphql-spec/pull/888

The issue with GraphQL is it tries to appease too many masters.

Similar to jsx. The language isn’t evolving.

The good thing is the spec is (almost) frozen, so there’s many implementations, the bad is it can encompass the flexibility of json schema can do.

Longer thread - Subscriptions RFC: Are Subscriptions and Live Queries the same thing?

https://github.com/graphql/graphql-spec/issues/284

You’ve probably figured it out by now, but for others who may be in a similar position; GraphQL is a specification (with various implementations) and you can read up on the spec here: https://spec.graphql.org/

If you're asking whether GraphQL supports anonymous objects that can be arbitrarily nested then no, it doesn't.

show this feature request some love https://github.com/graphql/graphql-spec/issues/174

* Performance: It's just hard to track down what makes an operation slow. The waterfall nature of resolvers is a big contributor

[1] https://github.com/graphql/graphql-spec/issues/488

:::note GraphQL Union is available for Types only, not for Inputs. However, the oneOf directive will bridge the gap in the future.