I have REST API URL structure similar to:
/api/contacts GET Returns an array of contacts
/api/contacts/:id GET Returns the contact with id of :id
/api/contacts POST Adds a new contact and return it with an id added
/api/contacts/:id PUT Updates the contact with id of :id
/api/contacts/:id PATCH Partially updates the contact with id of :id
/api/contacts/:id DELETE Deletes the contact with id of :id
My question is about:
/api/contacts/:id GET
Suppose that in addition to fetching the contact by ID, I also want to fetch it by an unique alias.
What should be URI structure be if I want to be able to fetch contact by either ID or Alias?
If you're alias's are not numeric i would suggest using the same URI structure and figuring out if it's an ID or an alias on your end. Just like Facebook does with username and user_id. facebook.com/user_id or facebook.com/username.
Another approach would be to have the client use GET /contacts with some extra GET parameters as filters to first search for a contact and then looking up the ID from that response.
Last option i think would be to use a structure like GET /contacts/alias/:alias. But this would kinda imply that alias is a subresource of contacts.
The path and query part of IRIs are up to you. The path is for hierarchical data, like api/version/module/collection/item/property, the query is for non-hierarchical data, like ?display-fields="id,name,etc..." or ?search="brown teddy bear"&offset=125&count=25, etc...
What you have to keep in mind, that you are working with resources and not operations. So the IRIs are resource identifiers, like DELETE /something, and not operation identifiers, like POST /something/delete. You don't have to follow any structure by IRIs, so for example you could use simply POST /dashuif328rgfiwa. The server would understand, but it would be much harder to write a router for this kind of IRIs, that's why we use nice IRIs.
What is important that a single IRI always belongs only to a single resource. So you cannot read cat properties with GET /cats/123 and write dog properties with PUT /cats/123. What ppl usually don't understand, that a single resource can have multiple IRIs, so for example /cats/123, /cats/name:kitty, /users/123/cats/kitty, cats/123?fields="id,name", etc... can belong to the same resource. Or if you want to give an IRI to a thing (the living cat, not the document which describes it), then you can use /cats/123#thing or /users/123#kitty, etc... You usually do that in RDF documents.
What should be URI structure be if I want to be able to fetch contact
by either ID or Alias?
It can be /api/contacts/name:{name} for example /api/contacts/name:John, since it is clearly hierarchical. Or you can check if the param contains numeric or string in the /api/contacts/{param}.
You can use the query too, but I don't recommend that. For example the following IRI can have 2 separate meanings: /api/contacts?name="John". You want to list every contact with name John, or you want one exact contact. So you have to make some conventions about this kind of requests in the router of your server side application.
I would consider adding a "search" resource when you are trying to resolve a resource with the alias:
GET /api/contacts/:id
and
GET /api/contacts?alias=:alias
or
GET /api/contacts/search?q=:alias
First of all, the 'ID' in the URL doesn't have to be a numerical ID generated by your database. You could use any piece of data (including the alias) in the URL, as long as its unique. Of course, if you are using numerical ID's everywhere, it is more consistent to do the same in your contacts API. But you could choose to use the aliases instead of numeric IDs (as long as they are always unique).
Another approach would be, as Stromgren suggested, to allow both numeric IDs and aliases in the URL:
/api/contacts/123
/api/contacts/foobar
But this can obviously cause problems if aliases can be numeric, because then you wouldn't have any way to differentiate between an ID and a (numeric) alias.
Last but not least, you can implement a way of filtering the complete collection, as shlomi33 already suggested. I wouldn't introduce a search resource, as that isn't really RESTful, so I'd go for the other solution instead:
/api/contacts?alias=foobar
Which should return all contacts with foobar as alias. Since the alias should be unique, this will return 1 or 0 results.
Related
I am trying to construct URL for the REST API that needs to use complex resource identifier
e.g. Get specific Course
GET /Courses/{id}
where {id} = {TermId}/{SubjectId}/{SectionID}
Is it acceptable to format it as below or there is a better way?
/Courses/{TermId}/{SubjectId}/{SectionID}
It's rather not acceptable, because it introduces confusion to the clients that use the API you provided. Basically / (slash) indicates a new resource. In this particular case you have Courses resources which has a particular resource with TermId which in turn has SubjectId and so on. This is not readable and not what client expects. I see two possible solutions here:
Use combined key, separated with - or other URI-useable sign:
GET /Courses/{TermId}-{SubjectId}-{SectionID}
Just parse such key on the server side.
Use other URI
GET /Courses/{courseId}/Terms/{termId}/subjects/{subjectId}/sections/{sectionId}
There are also other ideas, the one you suggested doesn't seem useable.
As I see it, you have two reasonable options:
Use a compound key, as #Opal said
Use a surrogate key (an arbitrary key with no relation to your three unique constraints)
The advantage to (1) is that the URI is human-hackable - assuming that the user remembers the order to put the values in and what valid values can be. If a significant use case is going to be students using these URIs to find courses online they might like to skip the search step if they have all the relevant information and just punch those values into the URI. If your response type is HTML, this is not unreasonable.
The advantage to (2) is that it's not human-hackable - REST is about discovery through hypermedia. If the response type is JSON or XML, humans aren't going to be using these URIs directly.
I would suggest supporting the following endpoints:
GET /courses?termId={}&subjectId={}§ionId={}
// all three parameters are optional. returns all courses that match the
// specified criteria - either a subset of the data or the full course
// data for each result
GET /courses/{courseId}
Take a simple table person:
CREATE TABLE person
(
id bigint,
name nvarchar(128),
age int
)
You can represent this in a REST interface:
GET /person
GET /person/5
PUT /person
POST /person/5
PATCH /person/5
DELETE /person/5
This interface would expect 2 parameters:
{
name: 'Joe',
age: 16,
}
You could then define an API that would expect those two parameters, and even make the age optional.
However, suppose you wanted to define a model on the client side that wanted to do fancy things with this person table, such as pulling all teenagers, how would you best represent this?
I suppose I could do something this, only support GET, and then arbitrarily require different parameters which matched the query needs:
GET /person/teenager
However, I don't know that this would properly meet all use cases. For example, I believe REST urls should only have nouns, and I am not sure how to put something like this into noun form:
GET /person/by-age
Any ideas / references / suggestions?
The most common way to constrain your person listing results is to use query parameters. You can define your query parameters in any way that is useful for your API. One example might be GET /person?age=13..20 to get only teenagers. Another example might be GET /person/?filter=age>=13,age<20.
I'm running a query vs the Google Places RadarSearch API and don't entirely understand the results. I'm trying to find nearby Tesco Supermarkets. My query is structured like this:
https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/place/radarsearch/xml?location=51.503186,-0.126446&types=store&keyword=tesco&name=tesco&radius=5000&key=XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX
I've tried a bunch of variations of the fields types, keyword and name. None of the results are Tesco stores. Am i missing something?
The Google docs show the fields as:
keyword — A term to be matched against all content that Google has indexed for this place, including but not limited to name, type, and address, as well as customer reviews and other third-party content.
name — One or more terms to be matched against the names of places, separated by a space character. Results will be restricted to those containing the passed name values. Note that a place may have additional names associated with it, beyond its listed name. The API will try to match the passed name value against all of these names. As a result, places may be returned in the results whose listed names do not match the search term, but whose associated names do.
I always get the maximum of 200 results which maybe includes 1 or 2 Tescos. When I check on Google maps there are 10 Tescos in the radius I am searching. It's as if the api is ignoring the name field. It doesn't matter what I populate in the name field, I still get the same results
UPDATE: Seems this is a known bug https://code.google.com/p/gmaps-api-issues/issues/detail?id=7082
maybe I am wrong, but I believe it is a commercial issue, google will show all business filtering them with a particular criteria they are no publishing the rules, for example in your search, the type you used was "store" , so they are returning to you all stores, and using the name or keyword in their own way who knows which criteria they are internally using, and there is something else, on the API description, the sample that they provide for radar search shows the name of the place in the result, but in the tests i am doing, they are not even sending the name, so you couldn't iterate those results, and filter by your own, for you to get the name, you have to do another call using:
https://maps.googleapis.com/maps/api/place/details/json?placeid=ChIJq4lX1doEdkgR5JXPstgQjc0&key=YOUR_KEY
Maybe there is another way but I don't see it.
I find the radar search is returning strange results today. It worked differently a couple of days ago.
The keyword-parameter has no effect at the moment and I have breaking integration-tests that were working before. I hope this is a temporary issue.
I filed a bug report for it: https://code.google.com/p/gmaps-api-issues/issues/detail?id=7086
I'm trying to use Freebase to list tourist attractions for cities by relevance.
Using the Topic API, it's simple to retrieve results for a certain city using its MID (e.g. "/m/04jpl" for London)
https:// www.googleapis.com/freebase/v1/topic/m/04jpl/?&filter=/travel/travel_destination/tourist_attractions
However, this gives a limited 10 results. The response ends with "count": 87.0". How do I get all 87? It's possible to click a "87 values total" link on London's Freebase page. Effectively, I want to do the same here.
I realise I could use MQL, but I want the results to be ranked by relevance, not by timestamp. Using the Search API, it's possible to rank by freebase, entity or schema, so I'd rather use that.
First, I looked at the Search Output schema for the Search API. However, even outputting "all" didn't produce Tourist Attraction results. Using metaschema with the Search API DID work. I used "part_of" to select London. However, it only works for some locations:
https:// www.googleapis.com/freebase/v1/search?limit=50&filter=(all%20type:/travel/tourist_attraction%20part_of:/m/04jpl)&indent=true
What I REALLY want to be able to do is make it work for a relatively unknown location like "Loughborough" (MID /m/01z21p). As you can see, substituting /m/04jpl for /m/01z21p produces no results:
https:// www.googleapis.com/freebase/v1/search?limit=50&filter=(all%20type:/travel/tourist_attraction%20part_of:/m/01z21p)&indent=true
Looking at "Loughborough", we see that its tourist attraction like "Loughborough Town Hall" has a "/travel/tourist_attraction/near_travel_destination" of "Loughborough". How would I compose this filter?
I want something like the following (that actually works):
https:// www.googleapis.com/freebase/v1/search?limit=50&filter=(all%20type:/travel/tourist_attraction)&filter=(/travel/tourist_attraction/near_travel_destination:/m/01z21p)&indent=true
Thanks!
NOTE: To enter the links into your browser you need to remove the space between the https:// and www. I would have done so, but I don't have the required permissions here yet to post more than 2 links.
I solved this problem using 2 Freebase API calls.
1) An MQL query that gets a list of all the tourist attractions for a particular MID. These results are not ranked in any useful way. I am also returning the result number to make processing a little easier later
https://www.googleapis.com/freebase/v1/mqlread?query={"mid":"/m/04jpl","/travel/travel_destination/tourist_attractions":[{"mid":null}],"resultnumber:/travel/travel_destination/tourist_attractions":[{"return":"count"}]}
The list of returned MIDs are then used to create a new query (using a for loop). You must enter all MIDs returned from the above query, so that they can all be ranked together.
2) https://www.googleapis.com/freebase/v1/search?limit=10&filter=(any%20mid:/m/0gsxw%20mid:/m/01d_0p%20mid:/m/07gyc)&scoring=entity
It's best to choose a return format that just returns MIDs, to ensure that loading times aren't extensive.
You then have a ranked list of MIDs! You'll need one final query to return whatever details you desire.
I hope this has proved helpful.
In the android Notes demo, it accepts the URI:
sUriMatcher.addURI(NotePad.AUTHORITY, "notes", NOTES);
sUriMatcher.addURI(NotePad.AUTHORITY, "notes/#", NOTE_ID);
Where the difference between notes and notes/# is that notes/# returns the note who's ID matches #.
However, the managedQuery() method that is used to get data from the content provider has the following parameters:
Parameters
uri The URI of the content provider to query.
projection List of columns to return.
selection SQL WHERE clause.
selectionArgs The arguments to selection, if any ?s are pesent
sortOrder SQL ORDER BY clause.
So, is there any particular cause for the design decision of providing a URI for that, rather than just using the selection parameter? Or is it just a matter of taste?
Thank you.
I thinks its so you can do more complex lookups without having to complicate your selections and arguments. For example in my project I have multiple tables but use the same selection and arguments. To filter content. By using the URI I don't have interpret the query, I can just switch on the URI. It.might be personal taste to begin with. But in more complex scenarios you appreciate the URI. You can also use * to match strings in the same.way you can with#.
I think it's mostly a matter of taste. IMHO, putting the id in the Uri is a little cleaner since you can make the id opaque rather than require the client to know that it actually represents a specific row id. For instance, you can pass a lookup key (like in the the Contacts API) rather than a specific row id.