[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CONNECTORS-98?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12907622#action_12907622
 ] 

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

I believe anyone has privileges sufficient to create a new page for the 
connectors wiki project.  I suggest that you do that so that your proposal is 
clear to all.

I'd also prefer that you change the actual json for objects as little as 
possible.  Your suggestion to remove the descriptive "outputconnection" label 
comes under that heading.  I thought this all through carefully - the code here 
has less flexibility because it is basically an internal representation of both 
json and xml, so some aspects of the way things are done are not going to be 
straightforward to pull off.  If we also really want to make changes like that, 
fine, but it's a whole different project, in my view.





> 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