users@jax-rs-spec.java.net

[jax-rs-spec users] [jsr339-experts] Re: Re: UriTemplate API?

From: Bill Burke <bburke_at_redhat.com>
Date: Fri, 22 Feb 2013 09:55:17 -0500

On 2/21/2013 12:37 PM, Marek Potociar wrote:
>
> On Feb 21, 2013, at 3:08 PM, Bill Burke <bburke_at_redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 2/20/2013 12:08 PM, Marek Potociar wrote:
>>> Hello experts,
>>>
>>> Please review the issue that has been recently filed:
>>> http://java.net/jira/browse/JAX_RS_SPEC-359
>>>
>>> In summary the user wants to be able take a URI template, e.g.
>>> "http://example.com/name/{name}/age/{age}" and then take a URI, e.g.
>>> "http://example.com/name/Arnold/age/65" (guess who...) and extract the
>>> parameter values information into a Map<String, String> instance.
>>>
>>> The solution may look like:
>>>
>>> UriBuilder builder
>>> = UriBuilder.fromUri("http://example.com/name/{name}/age/{age}");
>>> UriTemplate template = builder.template();
>>> Map<String, String> params = new HashMap<String, String>();
>>> if (template.match("http://example.com/name/Arnold/age/65", params)) {
>>> params.put("name", "Alois");
>>> URI uri = builder.buildFromMap(params);
>>> ...
>>> }
>>>
>>> The above requires following API changes:
>>>
>>> * introduce UriTemplate to represent, well, URI templates...
>>> * add ability to get UriTemplate instances from UriBuilder and WebTarget
>>> * expose the boolean UriTemplate.match(URI, Map<String,
>>> String>) method as part of the UriTemplate API.
>>>
>>> Now, finally, my question is:
>>>
>>> Q1. Do you think the above API would be useful?
>>> Q2. Is it something we should still try to add into JAX-RS 2.0, given
>>> where we are?
>>>
>>
>> I'd say extend UriBuilder with a match() method instead of adding yet another class we have to include within RuntimeDelegate. Something like:
>>
>> Map<String, String> match(String URI);
>>
>> match() returns null if it can't match the current expression with the passed in URI.
>
> Ok, your other email seems to make sense. Even though I think the user has a point (see issue comments) that the map should not be created by us, but user should be able to pass it as an input parameter. (Or maybe we can have 2 versions of the method.)
>
>>
>> Useful. Yes. Include in JAX-RS 2.0? Well... I don't get it...you've deferred some pretty trivial improvements that I've submitted and in some cases important JIRAs like:
>>
>> JAX_RS_SPEC-339
>> JAX_RS_SPEC-317
>>
>> But you want to include a brand new feature? Plus complain everytime I make a suggestion that we're too close to the PFD? A bit hypocritical don't you think?
>
> Maybe I should have just ignored this rant, but then again, it's rude to not reply to direct questions. :)
>
> Note that in my email I'm merely asking what you (EG) think. I'm not pushing for anything, or suggesting we should (or must) do anything. For that matter, I have not expressed any opinion about whether or not we should include the feature in 2.0. So to answer your last question, no, I do not think I'm being hypocritical here.
>
> Funny thing is that knowing you're somewhat frustrated after our recent conversations I tried to be extra careful to not sound like I would be pushing for anything and formulate the email as a pure summary of the issue at hand plus a couple of questions I'd like to get EG feedback on. Alas, apparently to no avail.
>

You are the spec lead. You're the one with deadlines. You decide when
you are closing feature requests. I don't care either way, but if the
spec is still open there are minor improvements I'd like to get in,
specifically the exception message stuff.

FWIW, I think the uri template stuff is a nice addition, but want new
methods on UriBuilder.

-- 
Bill Burke
JBoss, a division of Red Hat
http://bill.burkecentral.com