RESTful design is not an end in itself: If you find yourself adding complexity to honor the constraints of REST, consider the benefit of the complexity and only do it if the benefit is clear. Here's a case of a guy asking this perfectly ordinary question: How can I use POST to execute a query where the query string is too long to stuff into an URL? This question pops up once a year on the rest-discuss list.
Some responded with helpful suggestions to have the POST create a temporary resource, which when you GET it, returns the query results. Mark doesn't think this is restful. But I do, because the client and server understand that the semantics of whatever document told the client the URL to POST the query to, demand that the POSTed doc be a query document, and that the Location header in the response be the URI where the client can retrieve query results. It's all in the mime type of the document containing that link.
But that's neither here nor there. It's wrong to create this intermediate resource if you simply want to get the query results as if your URL were short enough to do a GET. It doesn't enhance interoperability, and it adds complexity to the server design, which now has to manage the lifecycle of these temporary resources. I'm not saying returning 303 is a bad thing; just that in the case where you really just want to emulate GET and workaround an artificial limitation, just POST the query and return the result in the entity body. This is perfectly RESTful, but that's beside the point: Keeping it simple is always a higher value than perfect RESTful design, as long as you don't degrade interoperability.
Hugh Winkler holding forth on computing and the Web
- ► 2008 (21)
- ► 2007 (38)
- ► 2006 (39)
- ▼ 2005 (28)