Re: URI Patterns and pattern ordering
Adam Taft adam at adamtaft.com writes: Is there a particular reason why you are using query string parameters for your post attributes? Hmm, I guess there's two issues here: (1) Is my example appropriate according to REST architectural principles? (2) How do you do order-independent multiple parameter processing in Restlet? You make good points about (1), and I will ponder them. I am still interested in the answer to question (2), since I assume that we all agree that REST architectural principles do not exclude the use of multiple query string parameters in all situations. Cheers, Philip
Re: URI Patterns and pattern ordering
On 5/23/07, Adam Taft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] I tend to think of query string parameters as optional parameters, and usually only used for GET requests. I totally agree that they are for optional parameters. However, I find them useful for optional stuff for non-GET requests, too. FWIW, John
Re: URI Patterns and pattern ordering
John D. Mitchell wrote: IIUC your need, the user ID should be in the URL proper since that's what is used to identify the specific resource. I.e., /users/johnm/... Right, that's actually a good point. It's possible that the best url scheme for the original poster is someting like: /users/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ If the email address is going to be used as the primary key (or at least a candidate key), then the above should work. In this case, to delve into the semantics a little, it should probably be a PUT rather than a POST (since the key is known ahead of time). Adam
Re: URI Patterns and pattern ordering
On 5/23/07, Adam Taft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John D. Mitchell wrote:
[...]
However, I find them useful for optional stuff for non-GET requests, too.
Do you have a use case for this? I'm genuinely curious.
?output={html,xhtml,json,etc.}
It's optional in the sense that it's identifying the same resource but
in different output formats.
Take care,
John
Re: URI Patterns and pattern ordering
John D. Mitchell wrote:
On 5/23/07, Adam Taft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John D. Mitchell wrote:
[...]
However, I find them useful for optional stuff for non-GET requests,
too.
Do you have a use case for this? I'm genuinely curious.
?output={html,xhtml,json,etc.}
It's optional in the sense that it's identifying the same resource but
in different output formats.
Right, but that's for a GET request. When are you specifying that for a
POST, PUT or DELETE?
Again, I'm just trying to understand a use case for query strings in a
POST/PUT/DELETE. I can't see it currently.
Adam
Re: URI Patterns and pattern ordering
Same thing. I.e., I want the result of the POST to be given in
various output formats, too.
John
On 5/23/07, Adam Taft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John D. Mitchell wrote:
On 5/23/07, Adam Taft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John D. Mitchell wrote:
[...]
However, I find them useful for optional stuff for non-GET requests,
too.
Do you have a use case for this? I'm genuinely curious.
?output={html,xhtml,json,etc.}
It's optional in the sense that it's identifying the same resource but
in different output formats.
Right, but that's for a GET request. When are you specifying that for a
POST, PUT or DELETE?
Again, I'm just trying to understand a use case for query strings in a
POST/PUT/DELETE. I can't see it currently.
Adam
Re: URI Patterns and pattern ordering
On 5/23/07, Adam Taft [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [...] The result of a successful POST should always and only be a HTTP 201 Created status. Included with this response will be a Location header to the newly created resource. From there, you perform a GET to the uri specified in the location header (and of course can specify the output query string option then). You still do that and return a useful body in the format they requested. Get the best of both worlds. Take care, John The anti-fanatic :-) Mitchell
