fix: use JSON:API compliant conversion

[elfin-sbreuers]

Following recommendations from here

https://jsonapi.org/format/#fetching-pagination

while being close to the ways used internally in api-platform.

===

This addresses some of the issues discussed in this issue.

Going forward, there are two possible approaches:

• Support the default pagination parameters of API Platform (page, itemsPerPage, pagination) alongside filters and the JSON:API page[...] structure
• Or adopt the JSON:API pagination format exclusively

Depending on the chosen approach, the links section needs to be handled accordingly:

• If JSON:API-style pagination is used, the links key should be updated to reflect it
• If API Platform parameters are also supported at the top level, the existing links handling can remain unchanged

This ultimately comes down to a design decision based on the desired level of compatibility and consistency.

[soyuka]

I left a detailed response on #7888 explaining the situation.

In short: the JSON:API spec is explicitly agnostic about pagination strategy — page[number]/page[size] are examples, not requirements. API Platform uses page[page]/page[itemsPerPage] which is equally valid.

Hardcoding the mapping number→page and size→itemsPerPage in JsonApiProvider would be opinionated and couples the provider to one specific pagination vocabulary. Users who want custom names like page[number]/page[size] can already achieve this via QueryParameter with a provider callable — see the example in my comment on the issue.

I don't think we should merge this as-is.

Comment mostly generated with Claude.

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.