- From: Ryan J. McDonough <ryan@damnhandy.com>
- Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2014 19:02:34 -0500
- To: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
- Cc: public-hydra@w3.org, Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Message-Id: <C5908930-C7FF-4E5D-A60A-1953E7181561@damnhandy.com>
On Feb 6, 2014, at 12:29 PM, Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 5, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
>>> Great. So, before I close this issue I would like to get Mark's
>>> opinion (that's why I CCed you). Mark, do you agree with Ryan on
>>> this or do you think Operations do violate REST's uniform
>>> interface constraint?
>>
>> I believe they violate the constraint, yes.
>
> Let me ask a provocative question: Why do you think Operations violate the
> constraint whereas link relations, which further describe a potential GET
> request, don’t?
I’m very interested in this as well. But I think the GET request may be too trivial. Give the following Link header:
Link: <http://example.com/search>; rel="search"; title="Simple Search”
We could express this in Hyrda with something like:
“@id” : "http://example.com/search”,
“@type” : “search”
I don’t think that’s where Mark is concerned. Please correct me if I am mistaken Mark)
I believe the area of concern arises in the more detailed operations that send message. But since I’m missing it too, I thought I’d take a moment and create a search use case and express it in HTML, Open Search, and Hyrda.
In HTML we have:
<form id="search" action="http://example.com/search" method="POST">
<input type="text" id="q"/>
<input type="text" id="count"/>
<input type="text" id="start"/>
</form>
Now I’m assuming here that HTML Forms do not violate the constraints as well. But HTML Forms seem to be okay [1].
And in OpenSearch with the Parameter Extension[2]:
<Url xmlns:parameters="http://a9.com/-/spec/opensearch/extensions/parameters/1.0/"
template="http://example.com/search"
parameters:method="POST"
parameters:enctype="application/x-www-form-urlencoded">
<parameters:Parameter name="q"/>
<parameters:Parameter name="count"/>
<parameters:Parameter name="start"/>
</Url>
And finally in Hydra:
{
"@context": "http://www.w3.org/ns/hydra/context.jsonld",
"@id": "http://example.com/search",
"operations": [
{
"@type": "Search",
"method": "POST"
"expects" : {
"@type": "hydra:Class",
"supportedProperty": [
{
"property": {
"@id": "q",
"@type": "rdf:Property",
"range": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#string"
},
"required": true,
"readonly": false,
"writeonly": false
},
{
"property": {
"@id": "count",
"@type": "rdf:Property",
"range": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer"
},
"required": false,
"readonly": false,
"writeonly": false
},
{
"property": {
"@id": "start",
"@type": "rdf:Property",
"range": "http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#integer"
},
"required": false,
"readonly": false,
"writeonly": false
}
]
}
}
]
}
When I look at all 3, I see a very generic HTTP POST request. Without a doubt, the Hydra version is more expressive we assume that the client will generate JSON-LD request that could also work equally well if it were sent as application/x-www-form-urlencoded. To my tiny monkey brain, these all feel like the same thing and I’m struggling to see how they are different? I am assuming of course that HTML forms DO NOT violate the uniform interface constraint.
Ryan-
[1] http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be-hypertext-driven
[2] http://www.opensearch.org/Specifications/OpenSearch/Extensions/Parameter
+-----------------------------------------------+
Ryan J. McDonough (a.k.a John Yaya)
http://damnhandy.com
http://twitter.com/damnhandy
Received on Friday, 7 February 2014 00:03:05 UTC