[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-98?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12907538#action_12907538
 ] 

Karl Wright commented on CONNECTORS-98:
---------------------------------------

Has there been any progress made on this issue?

I'm going to need some definition very shortly at least for what you intend to 
do - or if you don't want to do it, I'll take a crack at it.  Specifically, can 
you write a wiki page that has tables similar to the one that currently 
describes the API, which instead has your new API?   I think this is a 
straightforward transformation, although you will need a new column ("HTTP 
verb").


> API should be "pure" RESTful with the API verb represented using the HTTP 
> GET/PUT/POST/DELETE methods
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CONNECTORS-98
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-98
>             Project: Apache Connectors Framework
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: API
>    Affects Versions: LCF Release 0.5
>            Reporter: Jack Krupansky
>             Fix For: LCF Release 0.5
>
>
> (This was originally a comment on CONNECTORS-56 dated 7/16/2010.)
> It has come to my attention that the API would be more "pure" RESTful if the 
> API verb was represented using the HTTP GET/PUT/POST/DELETE methods and the 
> input argument identifier represented in the context path.
> So,  GET outputconnection/get \{"connection_name":_<connection_name>_\} would 
> be GET outputconnections/<connection_name>
> and GET outputconnection/delete \{"connection_name":_<connection_name>_\} 
> would be DELETE outputconnections/<connection_name>
> and GET outputconnection/list would be GET outputconnections
> and PUT outputconnection/save 
> \{"outputconnection":_<output_connection_object>_\} would be PUT 
> outputconnections/<connection_name> 
> \{"outputconnection":_<output_connection_object>_\}
> What we have today is certainly workable, but just not as "pure" as some 
> might desire. It would be better to take care of this before the initial 
> release so that we never have to answer the question of why it wasn't done as 
> a "proper" RESTful API.
> BTW, I did check to verify that an HttpServlet running under Jetty can 
> process the DELETE and PUT methods (using the doDelete and doPut method 
> overrides.)
> Also, POST should be usable as an alternative to PUT for API calls that have 
> large volumes of data.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

Reply via email to