Is there any way to specify custom paths for resources?
Example: <Resource name="User" path="/manageUsers" {...}>
If it's not possible "per resource", can we for example have all the CRUD pages be under a same basepath like: /crud/{/$resource.name} but keep the custom routes without that basepath.
Thank you very much.
EDIT #1
For context, we are building an admin panel that will have a lot of flows, basically step-by-step creation of resources. So I applaud the react-admin library for what it does (manage the CRUD part), but I want more flexibility in how the URLs are going to be.
I will need to have a section called /manageUsers/ that will have some data like a dashboard, and then the list could be /manageUsers/list/.
And then I may need another section called /customers/ that would list directly on that page.
EDIT #2
To give another use case, I'm trying to use graphQL as the dataProvider, and I had to rename all my resources since the rest API is using users where as the graphQL resource is User. So all my urls are now different!
I hope that makes it a bit more clear.
Is there any way to specify custom paths for resources?
No, this is not supported at the moment. One way to tackle this would be to use manageUsers as the resource name and translate it to User in your dataProvider.
I will need to have a section called /manageUsers/ that will have some data like a dashboard, and then the list could be /manageUsers/list/.
Definitely not supported by default either. However, you can replace the default Resource component with your own. It actually just creates routes for the resource inside a React Router switch. Note that you'll probably have to override the redirect prop of some components (such as Edit) because, when passed list, they expect the list to be at the resource root path.
I had to rename all my resources since the rest API is using users where as the graphQL resource is User
That's the dataProvider job to translate resources names into what your backend expect. Use resource names that make sense for your users (url wise).
Related
I am planning to have these endpoints for our REST APIs.
PUT /tenant/:tenantId/users/save/:username
POST /tenant/:tenantId/users/invite
GET /tenant/:tenantId/users/fetch
GET /tenant/:tenantId/users/fetch/:username
PATCH /tenant/:tenantId/users/activate/:username
POST /tenant/:tenantId/groups/save/
Verbs such as save/fetch/activate are from the consistency point of view. Are these RESTFul according to the REST principles? How should these be changed if at all? Any recommendations?
According to this REST Resource Naming Guide:
RESTful URI should refer to a resource that is a thing (noun) instead of referring to an action (verb) because nouns have properties which verbs do not have – similar to resources have attributes.
And also
URIs should not be used to indicate that a CRUD function is performed. URIs should be used to uniquely identify resources and not any action upon them. HTTP request methods should be used to indicate which CRUD function is performed.
So let's take your first URI as example
PUT /tenant/:tenantId/users/save/:username
Here you are using the verb save. As mentioned before you should not be indicating a CRUD operation in the URI, in this case using a POST would be more appropriate.Here is a guide with the purpose of each HTTP verb. Knowing this, I think that for example a more appropriate URI for that case would be something like
POST /tenants/:tenantId/users/:username
In this cases:
GET /tenant/:tenantId/users/fetch
GET /tenant/:tenantId/users/fetch/:username
you should remove the fetch because you are already telling through the GET verb that data is being fetched. Same goes for the 6th example.
But, this doesn't mean that you can't use verbs in your URIs, in fact there is a specific category called controller which as mentioned in the same guide:
A controller resource models a procedural concept. Controller resources are like executable functions, with parameters and return values; inputs and outputs.
Use “verb” to denote controller archetype.
This controllers resources could go well (I asume) with for example your
GET /tenant/:tenantId/users/activate/:username.
But I would think that the verb activate should go last:
GET /tenant/:tenantId/users/:username/activate
First note: REST doesn't care what spelling conventions you use for your resource identifiers. Once you figure out the right resources, you can choose any identifiers for them that you like (so long as those identifiers are consistent with the production rules defined in RFC 3986).
"Any information that can be named can be a resource" (Fielding, 2000), but its probably most useful to think about resources as abstractions of documents. We use HTTP as an application protocol whose application domain is the transfer of documents over a network.
GET
This is the method we use to retrieve a document
PATCH
PUT
POST
These methods all indicate requests to edit a document (specifically, to edit the request target).
PUT and PATCH are each ask the server to make its copy of a document look like the client's local copy. Imagine loading a web page into an editor, making changes, and then "saving" those changes back to the server.
POST is less specific; "here's a document that we created by filling in a web form, edit yourself appropriately". It is okay to use POST: after all, the web was catastrophically successful and we're still using POST in our form submissions.
The useful work is a side effect of these edits.
Are these RESTFul according to the REST principles?
Do they work like a web site? If they work like a web site: meaning you follow links, and send information to the server by submitting forms, or editing the webpages and submitting your changes to the server, then it is REST.
A trick though: it is normal in REST that a single method + request uri might have different useful side effects. We can have several different HTML forms that all share the same Form.action. Uploading changes to an order document might have very different effects if the edits are to the shipping address vs to the billing information or the order items.
Normal doesn't mean obligatory - if you prefer a resource model where each form request goes to a specific resource, that can be OK too. You get simpler semantics, but you support more resources, which can make caching trickier.
I wanted to know if there is a way to dynamically generate routes based on data from a database?
Currently, i am defining my routes in a routes file and then importing that into my vue project. Is there a way i can have specific configurations stored on a database such as the path, name, meta data and then when the application loads, depending on the auth level of the user, create routes for that user?
Reason why I'm asking to create and not use a pre-written route with params is because i want to give my users (at some point in the future) the ability to create their own pages from my system.
So just wanted to know from the community if there is a way to do this based on an axios call or something?
You can just use dynamic routing. To create new templates, code must be changed anyway.
I think technically you are still better off using a title parameter with a common prefix and just looking up that title. In theory it sounds nice to have a completely dynamic application where anyone can create any page... until someone decides to use "login" as the page name and override your own login component, making the app unusable.
That said, you can use router.addRoutes to dynamically add routes to your router. Create a router with the static routes (e.g. your homepage, your login page, your 404 page), then extend your router based on an api call.
I want to create custom rest api in magento, I tried calling it using tutorials available, but some how i am only able to call _retrieve and _retrieveCollection method only using GET.
So what I want to know how to create routes in api2.xml, so that i can call all the functions defined like:
_create
_retrieve
_delete
_update
_retrieveCollection
_multiCreate
_multiUpdate
_multidelete
and also want to know, when to use GET, POST, PUT and DELETE.
Any help is much appreciated.
So what I want to know how to create routes in api2.xml
Those other functions permissions are defined by the existence of for example <create>1</create> under the privileges for the role you want to use.
Once you've defined the privileges for your role(s), the routes depend on each type.
The easiest way (since the Magento API is not well referenced if you're adding your own things to it) is to look at existing core Magento code to see how they do it.
For example:
_create() is handled by the same endpoint as _retrieveCollection(), just use POST instead of GET. route_collection route. _create() uses the create privilege, while _retrieveCollection() uses the retrieve privilege.
_retrieve() is a GET request, defined as the route_entity route given the retrieve privilege
_delete() is a DELETE request to an entity endpoint (route_entity), given the delete privilege is granted
For multi examples, take a look for existing core code examples, e.g. _multiCreate(): Mage_Catalog_Model_Api2_Product_Website_Rest.
I'm struggling to find an answer to this (perhaps because I'm not asking the question properly) ...
I'm building API to expose resources for a basic social networking service I'm creating.
My understanding is that the structure of URLs in an API is essentially a hierarchy, directory like structure. I think that means I can have multiple endpoints to reach the same resources or collections of resource links.
For example:
I have an endpoint
www.domain.api.org/users/{:uid}/posts
Which will return all posts sent by the user or that the user is tagged in. Seems ok, but what if I have an endpoint such as:
www.domain.api.org/posts
Which when hit with a http GET will return all public posts (i.e. all users' posts plus his friends' and public posts).
The difference is that the first URL points to user owned resources whereas the second to public ones (of which the users posts are included of course)
Are these okay or am I doing it the wrong / less sensible way?
To reiterate, can I have multiple endpoints which point to different contexts/views of the same resource?
Basically multiple endpoints for the same resources should be avoided. However in this particular case it does make sense.
What you can do is to introduce optional query param userId to the following endpoint:
www.domain.api.org/posts/?userId=<userId>
If this substitutes the first endpoint you mentioned that's the way to go.
I would like to add ontop of #Opal's answer.
Are these okay or am I doing it the wrong / less sensible way?
Ideally, like Opal mentioned, you would use queryParams in your url. For many applications I have build, I don't know the uids returned from the api beforehand, so selecting an item and passing it inside my url as a query parameter makes sense. But it also has the added benefit of having your key inside your url, allowing you to bookmark it, pass the url to another user and they will automatically see the same data you want them to see.
To iterate: Is your current implementation wrong? No, but ideally you would use a combination of both route parameters are query parameters to achieve this
To create an endpoints, you have to be sure that you have these information at once:
Name of the endpoint
Status: activate or not (required) - is the endpoint activated or disable
Service profile (required) - ID of the Service Profile assigned to the endpoint.
Tariff profile (required) - ID of the tariff Profile assigned to the endpoint.
You can add another optional informations, and be sure of the structure of your endpoint.
Hope this helps you.
So I am updating a Play 1.2.x application with has the following setup
- controllers
- api
- Documents // create, update, read, delete, list
... // more controllers
- web
- Documents // list, read, etc...
.. // more controllers
The controllers in the api package render data as Json which is used by mobile clients (Android, iPhone).
Now I want to have a plain simple html web app consuming the api. So how can I consume the API from the controllers in the web package?
My goal is to avoid rewriting the api controllers logic in the web controllers logic.
Thanks!
Reusing methods between controllers is not the best practice in my opinion. Shared behavior should be coded in the model and both controllers can then use the same model methods.
Nevertherless if you want to do so, you can extract shared behavior in a public method in your apis controllers wich you can annotate as "#Util" and then call this method from your web controller.
There are not many details in your question, so I do not know if it applies, but usually when I implement REST APIs I let them serve their answers in different formats (JSON and HTML, and if you want JSONP and XML for instance).
The main idea is just to
check the request to know what format is required: either using the accept content type, the url extension, or even a parameter (and some more about it)
pick the right template (or skip a template if you have already correctly built your Json object)
In play there are different ways to do the first part, eg. through your routes: Request Content-Type in Play! Framework for REST webservices ; there is a specific page on Play documentation about this.
But the most important part in this answer is the second point: you should use the same controller and the HTML template should be able to render your page with the very same data that is sent back as json (or maybe a little more)!
NB. if you need to customize things a little more you can access the request object in the controller, check what the requested format is, and act accordingly to return appropriate data using the appropriate template!