Can't you declare the resource in the singular form? http://api.rubyonrails.org/classes/ActionController/Resources.html#M000308
On Jun 20, 3:12 pm, Rory McKinley <rorymckinleyli...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 20/06/2010 20:59, Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote: > <snip>> Wrong. If that were so, map.resource wouldn't exist. > > <snip> > > I think I explained myself badly - I am not arguing that you cannot do > it - but I was stating that for a consumer of the user/edit resource - > the consumer needs to know internal detail (that the user will be set to > the current user) to be able to answer the question "Which user am I > editing?". > > With the more explicit version - users/:id/edit - it is more obvious > which resource is being edited. > > So, whichever one is better depends on the OP's use case and how much he > wants the consumer to know about the implementation. I tend to err on > the side of more explicitness with methods that are publicly exposed but > I am always open to hearing counter opinions on the matter :) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Talk" group. To post to this group, send email to rubyonrails-t...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to rubyonrails-talk+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-talk?hl=en.
