## Recap { #recap }

Use multiple Pydantic models and inherit freely for each case.

   *
   * <p>It is recommended that the funnel be implemented as a Java enum. This has the benefit of
   * ensuring proper serialization and deserialization, which is important since {@link #equals}
   * also relies on object identity of funnels.
   *
   * @param funnel the funnel of T's that the constructed {@code BloomFilter} will use
   * @param expectedInsertions the number of expected insertions to the constructed {@code

import org.codelibs.fess.Constants;
import org.codelibs.fess.app.web.base.login.FessLoginAssist;
import org.codelibs.fess.entity.FacetInfo;
import org.codelibs.fess.entity.GeoInfo;
import org.codelibs.fess.entity.HighlightInfo;
import org.codelibs.fess.entity.PingResponse;
import org.codelibs.fess.entity.QueryContext;
import org.codelibs.fess.entity.SearchRequestParams.SearchRequestType;
import org.codelibs.fess.exception.FessSystemException;

In this case, it would use the certificate for `someapp.example.com`.

<img src="/img/deployment/https/https03.drawio.svg">

The client already **trusts** the entity that generated that TLS certificate (in this case Let's Encrypt, but we'll see about that later), so it can **verify** that the certificate is valid.

   * name, even if their bounds differ.
   *
   * <p>While resolving a type variable from a {@code var -> type} map, we don't care whether the
   * type variable's bound has been partially resolved. As long as the type variable "identity"
   * matches.
   *
   * <p>On the other hand, if for example we are resolving {@code List<A extends B>} to {@code
   * List<A extends String>}, we need to compare that {@code <A extends B>} is unequal to {@code <A

JWT might be used for other things apart from identifying a user and allowing them to perform operations directly on your API.

For example, you could identify a "car" or a "blog post".

Then you could add permissions about that entity, like "drive" (for the car) or "edit" (for the blog).

   * name, even if their bounds differ.
   *
   * <p>While resolving a type variable from a {@code var -> type} map, we don't care whether the
   * type variable's bound has been partially resolved. As long as the type variable "identity"
   * matches.
   *
   * <p>On the other hand, if for example we are resolving {@code List<A extends B>} to {@code
   * List<A extends String>}, we need to compare that {@code <A extends B>} is unequal to {@code <A

Next, we create a `HeroPublic` model, this is the one that will be **returned** to the clients of the API.

It has the same fields as `HeroBase`, so it won't include `secret_name`.

Finally, the identity of our heroes is protected! 🥷

It also re-declares `id: int`. By doing this, we are making a **contract** with the API clients, so that they can always expect the `id` to be there and to be an `int` (it will never be `None`).

* 📝 Simplify example for docs for Additional Responses, remove unnecessary `else`. PR [#4693](https://github.com/tiangolo/fastapi/pull/4693) by [@adriangb](https://github.com/adriangb).
* 📝 Update docs, compare enums with identity instead of equality. PR [#4905](https://github.com/tiangolo/fastapi/pull/4905) by [@MicaelJarniac](https://github.com/MicaelJarniac).