Databases
StackOverflow2013
Postsdbo
PODifferent RESTful representations of the same resource
 

Note that there are some explanatory texts on larger screens.

plurals
  1. PODifferent RESTful representations of the same resource
    primarykey
    data
    text
    <p>My application has a resource at <code>/foo</code>. Normally, it is represented by an HTTP response payload like this:</p> <pre><code>{"a": "some text", "b": "some text", "c": "some text", "d": "some text"} </code></pre> <p>The client doesn't always need all four members of this object. What is the <strong>RESTfully semantic</strong> way for the client to tell the server what it needs in the representation? e.g. if it wants:</p> <pre><code>{"a": "some text", "b": "some text", "d": "some text"} </code></pre> <p>How should it <code>GET</code> it? Some possibilities (I'm looking for correction if I misunderstand REST):</p> <ul> <li><code>GET /foo?sections=a,b,d</code>. <ul> <li>The query string (called a <em>query</em> string after all) seems to mean "find resources matching this condition and tell me about them", not "represent this resource to me according to this customization".</li> </ul></li> <li><code>GET /foo/a+b+d</code> My favorite <strong>if REST semantics doesn't cover this issue</strong>, because of its simplicity. <ul> <li>Breaks URI opacity, violating HATEOAS.</li> <li>Seems to break the distinction between resource (the sole meaning of a URI is to identify one resource) and representation. But that's debatable because it's consistent with <code>/widgets</code> representing a presentable list of <code>/widget/&lt;id&gt;</code> resources, which I've never had a problem with.</li> </ul></li> <li>Loosen my constraints, respond to <code>GET /foo/a</code>, etc, and have the client make a request per component of <code>/foo</code> it wants. <ul> <li>Multiplies overhead, which can become a nightmare if <code>/foo</code> has hundreds of components and the client needs 100 of those.</li> <li>If I want to support an HTML representation of <code>/foo</code>, I have to use Ajax, which is problematic if I just want a single HTML page that can be crawled, rendered by minimalist browsers, etc.</li> <li>To maintain HATEOAS, it also requires links to those "sub-resources" to exist within other representations, probably in <code>/foo</code>: <code>{"a": {"url": "/foo/a", "content": "some text"}, ...}</code></li> </ul></li> <li><code>GET /foo</code>, <code>Content-Type: application/json</code> and <code>{"sections": ["a","b","d"]}</code> in the request body. <ul> <li>Unbookmarkable and uncacheable.</li> <li>HTTP does not define body semantics for <code>GET</code>. It's legal HTTP but how can I guarantee some user's proxy doesn't strip the body from a <code>GET</code> request?</li> <li>My <a href="https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/postman-rest-client/fdmmgilgnpjigdojojpjoooidkmcomcm?hl=en" rel="noreferrer" title="REST client">REST client</a> won't let me put a body on a <code>GET</code> request so I can't use that for testing.</li> </ul></li> <li>A custom HTTP header: <code>Sections-Needed: a,b,d</code> <ul> <li>I'd rather avoid custom headers if possible.</li> <li>Unbookmarkable and uncacheable.</li> </ul></li> <li><code>POST /foo/requests</code>, <code>Content-Type: application/json</code> and <code>{"sections": ["a","b","d"]}</code> in the request body. Receive a <code>201</code> with <code>Location: /foo/requests/1</code>. Then <code>GET /foo/requests/1</code> to receive the desired representation of <code>/foo</code> <ul> <li>Clunky; requires back-and-forth and some weird-looking code.</li> <li>Unbookmarkable and uncacheable since <code>/foo/requests/1</code> is just an alias that would only be used once and only kept until it is requested.</li> </ul></li> </ul>
    singulars
    1. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PTQuestion
    1. USJordan
    1. USJordan
    plurals
    1. PL
      singulars
      1. LTLinked
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. This table or related slice is empty.
    1. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    2. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    3. PO
      singulars
      1. PTAnswer
    1. VO
      singulars
      1. PODifferent RESTful representations of the same resource
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    2. VO
      singulars
      1. PODifferent RESTful representations of the same resource
      1. This table or related slice is empty.
      1. VTUpMod
    3. VO
      singulars
      1. PODifferent RESTful representations of the same resource
      1. USLuckyStarr
      1. VTFavorite
    1. COI'd go for the query string approach. The query string is a part of the URL and that's where scoping information should go. It's also how Facebook does it. Here's a neat screencast discussing this matter: [Teach a dog to REST](https://blog.apigee.com/detail/restful_api_design/). It shows some other formats you might consider too.
      singulars
      1. PODifferent RESTful representations of the same resource
      1. UStoniedzwiedz
 

Querying!

 
Guidance
A row detail

Detail views are divided into sections. All the information in the data section comes from columns in the selected row. The other sections display data from other, related rows.

Related data can be related in a to-one or a to-many fashion. Captions of data related in a to-many fashion link to a list view showing a filtered view of the table.

Try moving around until you find a non-empty to-many entry and click on the label to get to one. You can move back to the root by clicking on the database name in the header.

SQuiL has stopped working due to an internal error.

If you are curious you may find further information in the browser console, which is accessible through the devtools (F12).

Reload