<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Versioned Resources In REST APIs</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/</link>
	<description>Living in a state of accord.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 03 Dec 2008 01:26:21 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: David Venz</title>
		<link>http://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/#comment-102029</link>
		<dc:creator>David Venz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 31 Jul 2007 10:07:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/#comment-102029</guid>
		<description>Adrian,

I would suggest that each version of the doc is a separate resource.  It has a relationship to the previous versions (however you encode that, if at all), and may share a fair few attributes with it (such as a similar start of URL).  Each version has what you might call a 'fully qualified' URL, and you can arrange for a 'short URL' to get the current one; much like the old Linux distro 'current' link idea.  The list of versions is a separate resource again.

Cheers,
-Dave.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Adrian,</p>
<p>I would suggest that each version of the doc is a separate resource.  It has a relationship to the previous versions (however you encode that, if at all), and may share a fair few attributes with it (such as a similar start of URL).  Each version has what you might call a &#8216;fully qualified&#8217; URL, and you can arrange for a &#8217;short URL&#8217; to get the current one; much like the old Linux distro &#8216;current&#8217; link idea.  The list of versions is a separate resource again.</p>
<p>Cheers,<br />
-Dave.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Symphonious &#187; APP For Scalability</title>
		<link>http://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/#comment-100505</link>
		<dc:creator>Symphonious &#187; APP For Scalability</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 08:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/#comment-100505</guid>
		<description>[...] &#160;         &#171; Versioned Resources In REST APIs [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] &nbsp;         &#171; Versioned Resources In REST APIs [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Adrian Sutton</title>
		<link>http://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/#comment-100418</link>
		<dc:creator>Adrian Sutton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 04:04:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/#comment-100418</guid>
		<description>DHH,
That seems to match my thinking with .../resource.html/versions (though the brain dump above didn't wind up saying that). It's reasonable but still doesn't quite feel right because the versions are really part of the original resource and this makes it look quite different. It feels more semantically correct to use parameters to request specific aspects of a resource like a specific version or the list of versions. That leads to URLs that don't really look like REST but I think it matches the semantic ideas better and the normal case is still a nice clean URL. Probably personal taste really.

Dave, WebDAV feels like overkill but is probably the right standards based option.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>DHH,<br />
That seems to match my thinking with &#8230;/resource.html/versions (though the brain dump above didn&#8217;t wind up saying that). It&#8217;s reasonable but still doesn&#8217;t quite feel right because the versions are really part of the original resource and this makes it look quite different. It feels more semantically correct to use parameters to request specific aspects of a resource like a specific version or the list of versions. That leads to URLs that don&#8217;t really look like REST but I think it matches the semantic ideas better and the normal case is still a nice clean URL. Probably personal taste really.</p>
<p>Dave, WebDAV feels like overkill but is probably the right standards based option.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DHH</title>
		<link>http://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/#comment-100416</link>
		<dc:creator>DHH</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:46:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/#comment-100416</guid>
		<description>Treat each version as it's own resource. /document/1 (latest version), /document/1/versions (list of all versions), /document/1/versions/a (a specific version).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Treat each version as it&#8217;s own resource. /document/1 (latest version), /document/1/versions (list of all versions), /document/1/versions/a (a specific version).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Brondsema</title>
		<link>http://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/#comment-100410</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Brondsema</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2007 03:00:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://www.symphonious.net/2007/07/27/versioned-resources-in-rest-apis/#comment-100410</guid>
		<description>WebDav versioning via rfc3253, perhaps?  That's idle speculation.. I have no experience with such things to know if/when that would be a good idea and when not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>WebDav versioning via rfc3253, perhaps?  That&#8217;s idle speculation.. I have no experience with such things to know if/when that would be a good idea and when not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
