[Catalyst] RFC: Catalyst::Controller::REST::DBIC

[J. Shirley]

On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 8:18 AM, Andrew Rodland <arodland at comcast.net> wrote:
> On Monday 05 May 2008 09:50:08 am J. Shirley wrote:
>  > On Mon, May 5, 2008 at 4:31 AM, Matt S Trout <dbix-class at trout.me.uk> wrote:
>  > > On Sun, May 04, 2008 at 09:06:30AM -0700, J. Shirley wrote:
>
> > >  I fail to see how whether the PK is the lookup key or not has any
>  > >  relevance at all to the original point, which was "your lookup key and
>  > >  names of actions might clash so it can be nice to have an extra path
>  > > component such as 'id' for the lookup part to disambiguate".
>  >
>  > Because I'm talking about REST and a verb in the URI doesn't need to be
>  > there.
>
>  But those nouns you're talking about aren't verbs at all.
>
>  Andrew

How is /create, /edit or /delete not a verb?

My argument is separate to the /create is valid in the /foo/{token}
bit.  I'm saying that /foo/create is silly to have in the first place,
and the /foo/id/{id} is nothing more than a conversion from named
parameters to positional, and ugly.

If you apply actual REST principles, you don't have such nonsense.
But again, as I said, this is if you are working with REST.  If REST
doesn't fit your application model, don't use it.  Just don't name
things REST when they are really CRUD.