I have a base url of an API like this
http://host/api/categories
In my database categories are a tree based model. I'd like to be able to have an api where I can hit urls like
http://host/api/categories/delivery
http://host/api/categories/delivery/food
http://host/api/categories/delivery/medicine
How can I pull everything after the word "categories" as a single string (and split it myself) or as a list of strings? Essentially getting List("delivery","medicine") out of the third example would be great.
Super easy answer just use
pathPrefix("listJobCategories" / Segments) { query =>
and query will be List[String]
Related
http://www.entityframework.info/Home/FullTextSearch
This example works fine for full word searches but does not talk about how to implement wild card suffix.
For example, I can do the following in SQL and get results for "bill" or "billy" using '*' in the end. How do I add that to my Interceptor?
select * from dbo.messagethread a
where contains(Text, '"bil*"')
If you look at that example code in that link above, I was thinking if something like this (below) is possible, but obviously that does not work as it is getting added to the parameter name not the value.
string.Format(#"contains([$1].[$2], #{0} *)", parameter.ParameterName));
There are questions like this one which talk about wildcards in full-text in SQL.
Look for this line in the example link provided in the question.
parameter.Value = value;
Then, to do prefix match, just add this line below that.
value = $"\"{value}*\""; // prefix match
We're basically changing the value of the parameter to have the * in it inside double quotes.
Now if you search for "bil", you get results for "bill"/"billy" and so on.
So, the problem seems simple at the beginning but is not. Using Mongo and Node.js.
Problem: I have a URL. I need to match that URL with all the URLs I have in my database. Remember, there is no rule that the URL I'm on always have "category" infront or things like that. And please don't take "cases" into consideration.
I have no clue of the name of parameters, or anything else.
Let's assume the URL is smth like example.com/category/product_name.html?session_id=2423412fd
In the database I only have example.com/product_name.html
The URL is smth like example.com/index.php?productid=6&category=3&utm_campaign=google&utm_source=click
In the database I only have example.com/index.php?productid=6
The URL is smth like example.com/product_name.html
In the database I only have example.com/category/subcategory/product.html
I think I made my point. What I'm looking is a solution that matches URL in any cases (they are more than these). It can be an external services, class or something complex.
But I need it to work, and to work very fast because is doing this on every page refresh.
Thank you!
I would use this function to separate the strings http://php.net/manual/en/function.parse-url.php
Then take parts of the path name which you want to match from the URL and query your database URL's looking for matches.
To follow on from Anagio's answer, the URL
example.com/index.php?productid=6&category=3&utm_campaign=google&utm_source=click
could be saved as a Mongo object like:
{
url: "example.com/index.php?productid=6&category=3&utm_campaign=google&utm_source=click",
indexes: [
"example.com",
"index.php",
"productid=6",
"category=3",
"utm_campaign=google",
"utm_source=click"
]
}
You could then split up any new URL using the same algorithm, then do a map/reduce on the indexes field for scoring and then take the highest score as the best "fuzzy match"
I have a rails 3 app and now i implementing filter for my catalog. Filters form pass data to controller through GET request. As a result i have link like this in my browser after i submit
my form (apply search):
http://localhost:3001/shoes?filter%5BShoeBottomType%5D%5B%5D=2&filter%5BShoeClassification%5D%5B%5D=1&filter%5BShoeClassification%5D%5B%5D=2&filter%5BShoeElation%5D%5B%5D=3&filter%5BShoeElation%5D%5B%5D=4&filter%5BShoeElation%5D%5B%5D=5&filter%5BShoeLiningColor%5D%5B%5D=2&filter%5BShoeLiningColor%5D%5B%5D=3&filter%5BShoeLiningColor%5D%5B%5D=4&filter%5BShoeTopColor%5D%5B%5D=1&filter%5BShoeTopColor%5D%5B%5D=2&filter%5Bonly_action%5D%5B%5D=1&page=2
Is there a way to do URL more beautiful?
PS i dont want use POST request, because I read that it is bad for SEO
TLDR: just leave it.
HTML forms serialize in a straightforward manner; the parameters are named after the HTML elements. The actual issue here is how the form elements are named. It looks like they have names like filter[ShoeBottomType][]; look into your HTML to see the name attributes. Since you're in Rails, I'm guessing you having a filter hash passed to your Rails controller method as a single argument, and since Rails expects hashes to use a certain URL format for hashes and arrays (it has to know how to deserialize it from the request), the form helper writes the form that way. And yours is especially complicated because the hash values are arrays, hence the extra set of brackets. Then it's URL encoded and you end up with an ugly mess.
You could avoid some of this problem by passing the inputs individually back to the controller instead of as a big hash. Something like:
def index
shoe_bottom_types = params[:bottom_types]
shoe_classifications = params[:classifications]
shoe_elations = params[:elations]
...
which will get you to: /shoes?bottomTypes[]=1&bottomTypes[]=2.... That doesn't seem much better, and now your controller is all gross. And I don't see how you're going to get rid of the brackets entirely if you want to have more than one of the same filter. I guess you could get crazy and do your own parsing in your controller, like breaking apart shoeBottomTypes=1|2, but then you'll have to do your own form serialization too. Again, just not worth it.
Backing up for a sec, the SEO stuff doesn't make much sense. Search engines won't fill out your form; they just follow links. The real reason you should use GET is that (presumably), submitting your form doesn't have side effects, since it's just a search. See here; it's important to use the right HTTP methods. If you use POST, you'll get weird warnings on reloads and you won't be able to bookmark the search.
Backing up even further, why do you care, especially now that SEO is out of the picture? Just as a quick demo, I did a google search for the word "thing" and this was the URL:
https://www.google.com/#hl=en&output=search&sclient=psy-ab&q=thing&pbx=1&oq=thing&aq=f&aqi=g2g-s1g1&aql=1&gs_sm=3&gs_upl=764l1877l0l1980l6l6l0l0l0l0l89l432l5l5l0&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_cp.r_qf.,cf.osb&fp=220ef4545fdef788&biw=1920&bih=1086
So URLs for form submissions can be long. The user won't even look at it.
The only possibility I can think of for why you'd care about the length/ugliness of your URL here is that you want, separately from the form, to create links to certain searches. There are several ways to handle that, but since I don't know whether that's relevant to you, I'll let that be a follow-up.
So bottom line, it looks like I'd expect, and trying to fix it sounds ugly and pointless.
If you do not want to use a POST request, then there is no other way then to put the form values in the URL -- they have to get to the server one way or another.
On the other hand however, I do not see why doing a POST would be bad for SEO and I would love to see the article that stated so.
My suggestion is that you could add some custom routes to beautify your urls.
For example :
http://localhost:3001/shoes/Type/2/Classification/1,2/Elation/3,4,5/LiningColor/2,3,4/TopColor/1,2/only_action/1/page/2
This is far much shorter than your initial URL ;)
The counterpart is that, as far as I know, you have to use always the same order for params in your url.
The routing rule is the following :
match "shoes/Type/:type/Classification/:classification/Elation/:elation/LiningColor/:liningcolor/TopColor/:topcolor/only_action/:only_action/page/:page" => "shoes#show"
You can retrieve the passed values in params array. You have to split the string containing , in order to retrieve the multiple values.
What should I use:
/findby/name/{first}_{last}
/findby/name/{first}-{last}
/findby/name/{first};{last}
/findby/name/first/{first}/last/{last}
etc.
The URI represents a Person resource with 1 name, but I need to logically separate the first from the last to identify each. I kind of like the last example because I can do:
/findby/name/first/{first}
/findby/name/last/{last}
/findby/name/first/{first}/last/{last}
You could always just accept spaces :-) (querystring escaped as %20)
But my preference is to just use dashes (-) ... looks nicer in the URL. unless you have a need to be able to essentially query in which case the last example is better as you noted
Why not use + for space?
I am at a loss: dashes, minuses, underscores, %20... why not just use +? This is how spaces are normally encoded in query parameters. Yes, you can use %20 too but why, looks ugly.
I'd do
/personNamed/Joe+Blow
I like using "_" because it is the most similar character to space that keeps the URL readable.
However, the URLs you provided don't seem really RESTful. A URL should represent a resource, but in your case it represents a search query. So I would do something like this:
/people/{first}_{last}
/people/{first}_{last}_(2) - in case there are duplicate names
It this case you have to store the slug ({first}_{last}, {first}_{last}_(2)) for each user record. Another option to prepend the ID, so you don't have to bother with slugs:
/people/{id}-{first}_{last}
And for search you can use non-RESTful URLs:
/people/search?last={last}&first={first}
These would display a list of search results while the URLs above the page for a particular person.
I don't think there is any use of making the search URLs RESTful, users will most likely want to share links to a certain person's page and not search result pages. As for the search engines, avoid having the same content for multiple URLs, and you should even deny indexing of your search result pages in robots.txt
For searching:
/people/search?first={first}&last={last}
/people/search?first=george&last=washington
For resource paths:
/people/{id}-{first}-{last}
/people/35-george-washington
If you are using Ruby on Rails v3 in standard configuration, here's how you can do it.
# set up the /people/{param} piece
# config/routes.rb
My::Application.routes.draw do
resources :people
end
# set up that {param} should be {id}-{first}-{last}
# app/models/person.rb
class Person < ActiveRecord::Base
def to_param
"#{id}-#{to_slug(first_name)}-#{to_slug(last_name)}"
end
end
Note that your suggestion, /findby/name/first/{first}/last/{last}, is not restful. It does not name resources and it does not name them succinctly.
The most sophisticated choice should always and first of all consider two constraints:
As you'll never know how skilled the developer or the device being implemented on is regarding handling of urlencoding, i will always try to limit myself to the table of safe characters, as found in the excellent rant (Please) Stop Using Unsafe Characters in URLs
Also - we want to consider the client consuming the API. Can we have the whole structure easily represented and accessible in the client side programming language? What special characters would this requirement leave us with? I.e. a $ will be fine in javascript variable names and thus directly accessible in the parsed result, but a PHP client will still have to use a more complex (and potentially more confusing) notation $userResult->{'$mostVisited'}->someProperty... that a shot in your own foot! So for those two (and a couple of other programming environments) underscore seems the only valid option.
Otherwise i mostly agree with #yfeldblum`s response - i'd distinct between a search endpoint vs. the actual unique resource lookup. Feels more REST to me, but more importantly, the two have a significant cost difference on your api server - this way you can easier distinct and i.e. charge a higher costs or rate limit the search endpoint - should you ever need it.
To be Pragmatic, as opposed to a "RESTafarian" the mentioned approach /people/35-george-washington could (and should imho) basically respond to just the id, so if you want a named, urlsafe-for-dummies-link, list the reference as /people/35_george_washington. Other ideas could be /people/35/#GeorgeWashington (so breaking tons of RFCs) or /people/35_GeorgeWashington - the API wouldn't care.
I have a set of actions that are returning time-series data with-in ranges specifiable to the minute.
They work fine with querystrings,
i.e.
/mycontroller/myaction?from=20091201 10:31&to=20091202 10:34
with or without URL encoded colons, but I thought it would be nice to have a pretty URL
/mycontroller/myaction/from-20091201 10:31/to-20091202 10:34
but this now strikes fear in the hear of IIS as it doesn't like colons in the URI so I get 'Bad Request' responses.
My question then, is what's a recommended/standard course of action to ensure I can keep the time in there?
Do I need to write a custom ModelBinder to parse my own datetime format? Should the actions just take strings for from and to and parse with a custom format eg "YYYYMMDD-HHmm". Can I specify a custom format somewhere? If so where? Or should I just give this up as folly and stick with querystring parameters?
Oh, and I see a lot of people go on about RESTful URLs; from what I've read there's nothing that says query strings aren't RESTful - it's more about appropriate use of existing HTTP action types.
You're right REST doesn't mean if it's its not in a folder structure its not REST.
The path structure is there to describe the resource. Querystrings can still be used to describe a filtered subset of such a resource. A date range fully qualifies as a filter criteria and should thus be perfectly RESTful being passed in as a querystring.