Jacob Møhl

My feedback

  1. 96 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    9 comments  ·  Azure mobile app  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  2. 363 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    7 comments  ·  Web Apps  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  3. 695 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    33 comments  ·  Web Apps  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  4. 655 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    5 comments  ·  Web Apps  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  5. 1,758 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    36 comments  ·  Web Apps  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  6. 113 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    13 comments  ·  Azure Functions » Feature  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Jacob Møhl commented  · 

    Very much needed for the transition to serverless apis.

    Some key features in a first release could be
    - ModelBinding [FromQuery], [FromBody] ect. with ModelState information
    - ApiExplorer information for Open API/Swagger generation (ProducesResponseType ect.)

    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  7. 138 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    unplanned  ·  20 comments  ·  Azure portal » Resource management  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  8. 22 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    3 comments  ·  SQL Server » Suggestions  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  9. 20 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  1 comment  ·  API Management » Defining APIs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Jacob Møhl commented  · 

    Or at least get a notification of the changes. The same for arrays in query strings, which are converted to strings.

  10. 11 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  1 comment  ·  API Management » Defining APIs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Jacob Møhl commented  · 

    I had i similar finding. Arrays in query strings get converted to strings (which is not the same).

  11. 88 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  0 comments  ·  API Management » Developer portal  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  12. 867 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  15 comments  ·  API Management » Developer portal  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  13. 132 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    planned  ·  5 comments  ·  API Management » API management experience  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  14. 154 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    under review  ·  4 comments  ·  API Management » Security  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  15. 549 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    9 comments  ·  API Management » Security  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  16. 659 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    13 comments  ·  API Management » Defining APIs  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →

    Hi all – we could really use more information on the use cases you would like us to deliver with this feature. To quote Darrel’s post below:

    Are you looking for some kind of UI in the portal to enable developers to subscribe to webhooks exposed by APIs?
    Or are you looking for the additional security provided API Management to limit what events a user can subscribe to?
    Do you want to correlate the API Management subscription ID with registered webhooks?
    Any information you can give about the scenarios you would like help with would be great.

    Many thanks

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Jacob Møhl commented  · 

    When talking about webhooks in relation to API Mangement i would like the APIM solution to support management of webhooks, that I as a API developer expose.

    So my consumers (3. party who interact with my API) can setup endpoint for my webhook enables APIs would call. This should be done in the API portal by the consumer.

    A solution could be that the APIs which use webhooks, could call some endpoint in the APIM and then APIM would delegate this call to who ever has set up a webhook/subscribes.

    There for I as a API developer shoould not be concerned about delivery of all webhook calls, only 1 to the APIM solution.

    I think much of the comments is about the possibility to get notified (by webhooks) of events happening inside the APIM solution for internal use by the API developer it self.

  17. 358 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    20 comments  ·  Web Apps  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  18. 778 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    20 comments  ·  Web Apps  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  19. 4 votes
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    0 comments  ·  Azure Resource Manager  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
    Jacob Møhl supported this idea  · 
  20. 724 votes
    Vote
    Sign in
    (thinking…)
    Sign in with: Microsoft
    Signed in as (Sign out)
    You have left! (?) (thinking…)
    planned  ·  26 comments  ·  API Management » API management experience  ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base