Search Results

Search found 11837 results on 474 pages for 'delicious api'.

Page 2/474 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Securing iOS or Android Backend API

    - by El Guapo
    I have an application that I am writing for both iOS and Android; this application will be served by a ReSTFUL API running on a cluster of servers on "the internets". I am curious how the rest of the world is going about securing their APIs so only specific applications running on iOS or Android can use these APIs. I could go the same route as other OAuth providers by providing a key/secret combination (2-legged OAuth), however, what do I do if I ever have to change these keys??? Do I create a new key/secret for every person that downloads the app???

    Read the article

  • API Design Techniques

    - by Dehumanizer
    Is it right or more beautiful to name the functions with an prefix, like in Qt? Or using "many" namespaces, but 'normal' names for functions? For example, slOpenFile(); //"sl" means "some lib" vs some_lib::file_functions::openFile(); UPD: I've read somewhere that the first variant(using some prefix) is better, because the API users can perform 'fast' search among the documentation and in the Internet. E.g. by typing the magic prefix search engine starts to advice the exact functions. Is it enough to use the first variant?

    Read the article

  • ASP.Net Web API in Visual Studio 2010

    - by sreejukg
    Recently for one of my project, it was necessary to create couple of services. In the past I was using WCF, since my Services are going to be utilized through HTTP, I was thinking of ASP.Net web API. So I decided to create a Web API project. Now the real issue is that ASP.Net Web API launched after Visual Studio 2010 and I had to use ASP.Net web API in VS 2010 itself. By default there is no template available for Web API in Visual Studio 2010. Microsoft has made available an update that installs ASP.Net MVC 4 with web API in Visual Studio 2010. You can find the update from the below url. http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/download/details.aspx?id=30683 Though the update denotes ASP.Net MVC 4, this also includes ASP.Net Web API. Download the installation media and start the installer. As usual for any update, you need to agree on terms and conditions. The installation starts straight away, once you clicked the Install button. If everything goes ok, you will see the success message. Now open Visual Studio 2010, you can see ASP.Net MVC 4 Project template is available for you. Now you can create ASP.Net Web API project using Visual Studio 2010. When you create a new ASP.Net MVC 4 project, you can choose the Web API template. Further reading http://www.asp.net/web-api/overview/getting-started-with-aspnet-web-api/tutorial-your-first-web-api http://www.asp.net/mvc/mvc4

    Read the article

  • Passing multiple POST parameters to Web API Controller Methods

    - by Rick Strahl
    ASP.NET Web API introduces a new API for creating REST APIs and making AJAX callbacks to the server. This new API provides a host of new great functionality that unifies many of the features of many of the various AJAX/REST APIs that Microsoft created before it - ASP.NET AJAX, WCF REST specifically - and combines them into a whole more consistent API. Web API addresses many of the concerns that developers had with these older APIs, namely that it was very difficult to build consistent REST style resource APIs easily. While Web API provides many new features and makes many scenarios much easier, a lot of the focus has been on making it easier to build REST compliant APIs that are focused on resource based solutions and HTTP verbs. But  RPC style calls that are common with AJAX callbacks in Web applications, have gotten a lot less focus and there are a few scenarios that are not that obvious, especially if you're expecting Web API to provide functionality similar to ASP.NET AJAX style AJAX callbacks. RPC vs. 'Proper' REST RPC style HTTP calls mimic calling a method with parameters and returning a result. Rather than mapping explicit server side resources or 'nouns' RPC calls tend simply map a server side operation, passing in parameters and receiving a typed result where parameters and result values are marshaled over HTTP. Typically RPC calls - like SOAP calls - tend to always be POST operations rather than following HTTP conventions and using the GET/POST/PUT/DELETE etc. verbs to implicitly determine what operation needs to be fired. RPC might not be considered 'cool' anymore, but for typical private AJAX backend operations of a Web site I'd wager that a large percentage of use cases of Web API will fall towards RPC style calls rather than 'proper' REST style APIs. Web applications that have needs for things like live validation against data, filling data based on user inputs, handling small UI updates often don't lend themselves very well to limited HTTP verb usage. It might not be what the cool kids do, but I don't see RPC calls getting replaced by proper REST APIs any time soon.  Proper REST has its place - for 'real' API scenarios that manage and publish/share resources, but for more transactional operations RPC seems a better choice and much easier to implement than trying to shoehorn a boatload of endpoint methods into a few HTTP verbs. In any case Web API does a good job of providing both RPC abstraction as well as the HTTP Verb/REST abstraction. RPC works well out of the box, but there are some differences especially if you're coming from ASP.NET AJAX service or WCF Rest when it comes to multiple parameters. Action Routing for RPC Style Calls If you've looked at Web API demos you've probably seen a bunch of examples of how to create HTTP Verb based routing endpoints. Verb based routing essentially maps a controller and then uses HTTP verbs to map the methods that are called in response to HTTP requests. This works great for resource APIs but doesn't work so well when you have many operational methods in a single controller. HTTP Verb routing is limited to the few HTTP verbs available (plus separate method signatures) and - worse than that - you can't easily extend the controller with custom routes or action routing beyond that. Thankfully Web API also supports Action based routing which allows you create RPC style endpoints fairly easily:RouteTable.Routes.MapHttpRoute( name: "AlbumRpcApiAction", routeTemplate: "albums/{action}/{title}", defaults: new { title = RouteParameter.Optional, controller = "AlbumApi", action = "GetAblums" } ); This uses traditional MVC style {action} method routing which is different from the HTTP verb based routing you might have read a bunch about in conjunction with Web API. Action based routing like above lets you specify an end point method in a Web API controller either via the {action} parameter in the route string or via a default value for custom routes. Using routing you can pass multiple parameters either on the route itself or pass parameters on the query string, via ModelBinding or content value binding. For most common scenarios this actually works very well. As long as you are passing either a single complex type via a POST operation, or multiple simple types via query string or POST buffer, there's no issue. But if you need to pass multiple parameters as was easily done with WCF REST or ASP.NET AJAX things are not so obvious. Web API has no issue allowing for single parameter like this:[HttpPost] public string PostAlbum(Album album) { return String.Format("{0} {1:d}", album.AlbumName, album.Entered); } There are actually two ways to call this endpoint: albums/PostAlbum Using the Model Binder with plain POST values In this mechanism you're sending plain urlencoded POST values to the server which the ModelBinder then maps the parameter. Each property value is matched to each matching POST value. This works similar to the way that MVC's  ModelBinder works. Here's how you can POST using the ModelBinder and jQuery:$.ajax( { url: "albums/PostAlbum", type: "POST", data: { AlbumName: "Dirty Deeds", Entered: "5/1/2012" }, success: function (result) { alert(result); }, error: function (xhr, status, p3, p4) { var err = "Error " + " " + status + " " + p3; if (xhr.responseText && xhr.responseText[0] == "{") err = JSON.parse(xhr.responseText).message; alert(err); } }); Here's what the POST data looks like for this request: The model binder and it's straight form based POST mechanism is great for posting data directly from HTML pages to model objects. It avoids having to do manual conversions for many operations and is a great boon for AJAX callback requests. Using Web API JSON Formatter The other option is to post data using a JSON string. The process for this is similar except that you create a JavaScript object and serialize it to JSON first.album = { AlbumName: "PowerAge", Entered: new Date(1977,0,1) } $.ajax( { url: "albums/PostAlbum", type: "POST", contentType: "application/json", data: JSON.stringify(album), success: function (result) { alert(result); } }); Here the data is sent using a JSON object rather than form data and the data is JSON encoded over the wire. The trace reveals that the data is sent using plain JSON (Source above), which is a little more efficient since there's no UrlEncoding that occurs. BTW, notice that WebAPI automatically deals with the date. I provided the date as a plain string, rather than a JavaScript date value and the Formatter and ModelBinder both automatically map the date propertly to the Entered DateTime property of the Album object. Passing multiple Parameters to a Web API Controller Single parameters work fine in either of these RPC scenarios and that's to be expected. ModelBinding always works against a single object because it maps a model. But what happens when you want to pass multiple parameters? Consider an API Controller method that has a signature like the following:[HttpPost] public string PostAlbum(Album album, string userToken) Here I'm asking to pass two objects to an RPC method. Is that possible? This used to be fairly straight forward either with WCF REST and ASP.NET AJAX ASMX services, but as far as I can tell this is not directly possible using a POST operation with WebAPI. There a few workarounds that you can use to make this work: Use both POST *and* QueryString Parameters in Conjunction If you have both complex and simple parameters, you can pass simple parameters on the query string. The above would actually work with: /album/PostAlbum?userToken=sekkritt but that's not always possible. In this example it might not be a good idea to pass a user token on the query string though. It also won't work if you need to pass multiple complex objects, since query string values do not support complex type mapping. They only work with simple types. Use a single Object that wraps the two Parameters If you go by service based architecture guidelines every service method should always pass and return a single value only. The input should wrap potentially multiple input parameters and the output should convey status as well as provide the result value. You typically have a xxxRequest and a xxxResponse class that wraps the inputs and outputs. Here's what this method might look like:public PostAlbumResponse PostAlbum(PostAlbumRequest request) { var album = request.Album; var userToken = request.UserToken; return new PostAlbumResponse() { IsSuccess = true, Result = String.Format("{0} {1:d} {2}", album.AlbumName, album.Entered,userToken) }; } with these support types:public class PostAlbumRequest { public Album Album { get; set; } public User User { get; set; } public string UserToken { get; set; } } public class PostAlbumResponse { public string Result { get; set; } public bool IsSuccess { get; set; } public string ErrorMessage { get; set; } }   To call this method you now have to assemble these objects on the client and send it up as JSON:var album = { AlbumName: "PowerAge", Entered: "1/1/1977" } var user = { Name: "Rick" } var userToken = "sekkritt"; $.ajax( { url: "samples/PostAlbum", type: "POST", contentType: "application/json", data: JSON.stringify({ Album: album, User: user, UserToken: userToken }), success: function (result) { alert(result.Result); } }); I assemble the individual types first and then combine them in the data: property of the $.ajax() call into the actual object passed to the server, that mimics the structure of PostAlbumRequest server class that has Album, User and UserToken properties. This works well enough but it gets tedious if you have to create Request and Response types for each method signature. If you have common parameters that are always passed (like you always pass an album or usertoken) you might be able to abstract this to use a single object that gets reused for all methods, but this gets confusing too: Overload a single 'parameter' too much and it becomes a nightmare to decipher what your method actual can use. Use JObject to parse multiple Property Values out of an Object If you recall, ASP.NET AJAX and WCF REST used a 'wrapper' object to make default AJAX calls. Rather than directly calling a service you always passed an object which contained properties for each parameter: { parm1: Value, parm2: Value2 } WCF REST/ASP.NET AJAX would then parse this top level property values and map them to the parameters of the endpoint method. This automatic type wrapping functionality is no longer available directly in Web API, but since Web API now uses JSON.NET for it's JSON serializer you can actually simulate that behavior with a little extra code. You can use the JObject class to receive a dynamic JSON result and then using the dynamic cast of JObject to walk through the child objects and even parse them into strongly typed objects. Here's how to do this on the API Controller end:[HttpPost] public string PostAlbum(JObject jsonData) { dynamic json = jsonData; JObject jalbum = json.Album; JObject juser = json.User; string token = json.UserToken; var album = jalbum.ToObject<Album>(); var user = juser.ToObject<User>(); return String.Format("{0} {1} {2}", album.AlbumName, user.Name, token); } This is clearly not as nice as having the parameters passed directly, but it works to allow you to pass multiple parameters and access them using Web API. JObject is JSON.NET's generic object container which sports a nice dynamic interface that allows you to walk through the object's properties using standard 'dot' object syntax. All you have to do is cast the object to dynamic to get access to the property interface of the JSON type. Additionally JObject also allows you to parse JObject instances into strongly typed objects, which enables us here to retrieve the two objects passed as parameters from this jquery code:var album = { AlbumName: "PowerAge", Entered: "1/1/1977" } var user = { Name: "Rick" } var userToken = "sekkritt"; $.ajax( { url: "samples/PostAlbum", type: "POST", contentType: "application/json", data: JSON.stringify({ Album: album, User: user, UserToken: userToken }), success: function (result) { alert(result); } }); Summary ASP.NET Web API brings many new features and many advantages over the older Microsoft AJAX and REST APIs, but realize that some things like passing multiple strongly typed object parameters will work a bit differently. It's not insurmountable, but just knowing what options are available to simulate this behavior is good to know. Now let me say here that it's probably not a good practice to pass a bunch of parameters to an API call. Ideally APIs should be closely factored to accept single parameters or a single content parameter at least along with some identifier parameters that can be passed on the querystring. But saying that doesn't mean that occasionally you don't run into a situation where you have the need to pass several objects to the server and all three of the options I mentioned might have merit in different situations. For now I'm sure the question of how to pass multiple parameters will come up quite a bit from people migrating WCF REST or ASP.NET AJAX code to Web API. At least there are options available to make it work.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in Web Api   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Should one always know what an API is doing just by looking at the code?

    - by markmnl
    Recently I have been developing my own API and with that invested interest in API design I have been keenly interested how I can improve my API design. One aspect that has come up a couple times is (not by users of my API but in my observing discussion about the topic): one should know just by looking at the code calling the API what it is doing. For example see this discussion on GitHub for the discourse repo, it goes something like: foo.update_pinned(true, true); Just by looking at the code (without knowing the parameter names, documentation etc.) one cannot guess what it is going to do - what does the 2nd argument mean? The suggested improvement is to have something like: foo.pin() foo.unpin() foo.pin_globally() And that clears things up (the 2nd arg was whether to pin foo globally, I am guessing), and I agree in this case the later would certainly be an improvement. However I believe there can be instances where methods to set different but logically related state would be better exposed as one method call rather than separate ones, even though you would not know what it is doing just by looking at the code. (So you would have to resort to looking at the parameter names and documentation to find out - which personally I would always do no matter what if I am unfamiliar with an API). For example I expose one method SetVisibility(bool, string, bool) on a FalconPeer and I acknowledge just looking at the line: falconPeer.SetVisibility(true, "aerw3", true); You would have no idea what it is doing. It is setting 3 different values that control the "visibility" of the falconPeer in the logical sense: accept join requests, only with password and reply to discovery requests. Splitting this out into 3 method calls could lead to a user of the API to set one aspect of "visibility" forgetting to set others that I force them to think about by only exposing the one method to set all aspects of "visibility". Furthermore when the user wants to change one aspect they almost always will want to change another aspect and can now do so in one call.

    Read the article

  • What is the evidence that an API has exceeded its orthogonality in the context of types?

    - by hawkeye
    Wikipedia defines software orthogonality as: orthogonality in a programming language means that a relatively small set of primitive constructs can be combined in a relatively small number of ways to build the control and data structures of the language. The term is most-frequently used regarding assembly instruction sets, as orthogonal instruction set. Jason Coffin has defined software orthogonality as Highly cohesive components that are loosely coupled to each other produce an orthogonal system. C.Ross has defined software orthogonality as: the property that means "Changing A does not change B". An example of an orthogonal system would be a radio, where changing the station does not change the volume and vice-versa. Now there is a hypothesis published in the the ACM Queue by Tim Bray - that some have called the Bánffy Bray Type System Criteria - which he summarises as: Static typings attractiveness is a direct function (and dynamic typings an inverse function) of API surface size. Dynamic typings attractiveness is a direct function (and static typings an inverse function) of unit testing workability. Now Stuart Halloway has reformulated Banfy Bray as: the more your APIs exceed orthogonality, the better you will like static typing My question is: What is the evidence that an API has exceeded its orthogonality in the context of types? Clarification Tim Bray introduces the idea of orthogonality and APIs. Where you have one API and it is mainly dealing with Strings (ie a web server serving requests and responses), then a uni-typed language (python, ruby) is 'aligned' to that API - because the the type system of these languages isn't sophisticated, but it doesn't matter since you're dealing with Strings anyway. He then moves on to Android programming, which has a whole bunch of sensor APIs, which are all 'different' to the web server API that he was working on previously. Because you're not just dealing with Strings, but with different types, the API is non-orthogonal. Tim's point is that there is a empirical relationship between your 'liking' of types and the API you're programming against. (ie a subjective point is actually objective depending on your context).

    Read the article

  • Determining Cost of API Calls

    - by Sam
    [This is a cross-post originally posted by me in SO. I think the question is more appropriate here.] I was going through the adwords API and came across their rate sheet - http://code.google.com/apis/adwords/docs/ratesheet.html . They charge $0.25 per 1000 API units and under the 'Operation Costs' sections list the cost (in API units) of different API calls. I am curious - based on what factors do they (and others API developers) calculate the cost of an API call? Is there any simple formula or a standard way to determine this? Note: When I say 'cost' of an API call, I don't mean the money but the API units. For example, how do you determine one API call costs 100 'units' and another 1000?

    Read the article

  • Passing multiple simple POST Values to ASP.NET Web API

    - by Rick Strahl
    A few weeks backs I posted a blog post  about what does and doesn't work with ASP.NET Web API when it comes to POSTing data to a Web API controller. One of the features that doesn't work out of the box - somewhat unexpectedly -  is the ability to map POST form variables to simple parameters of a Web API method. For example imagine you have this form and you want to post this data to a Web API end point like this via AJAX: <form> Name: <input type="name" name="name" value="Rick" /> Value: <input type="value" name="value" value="12" /> Entered: <input type="entered" name="entered" value="12/01/2011" /> <input type="button" id="btnSend" value="Send" /> </form> <script type="text/javascript"> $("#btnSend").click( function() { $.post("samples/PostMultipleSimpleValues?action=kazam", $("form").serialize(), function (result) { alert(result); }); }); </script> or you might do this more explicitly by creating a simple client map and specifying the POST values directly by hand:$.post("samples/PostMultipleSimpleValues?action=kazam", { name: "Rick", value: 1, entered: "12/01/2012" }, $("form").serialize(), function (result) { alert(result); }); On the wire this generates a simple POST request with Url Encoded values in the content:POST /AspNetWebApi/samples/PostMultipleSimpleValues?action=kazam HTTP/1.1 Host: localhost User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.2; WOW64; rv:15.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/15.0.1 Accept: application/json Connection: keep-alive Content-Type: application/x-www-form-urlencoded; charset=UTF-8 X-Requested-With: XMLHttpRequest Referer: http://localhost/AspNetWebApi/FormPostTest.html Content-Length: 41 Pragma: no-cache Cache-Control: no-cachename=Rick&value=12&entered=12%2F10%2F2011 Seems simple enough, right? We are basically posting 3 form variables and 1 query string value to the server. Unfortunately Web API can't handle request out of the box. If I create a method like this:[HttpPost] public string PostMultipleSimpleValues(string name, int value, DateTime entered, string action = null) { return string.Format("Name: {0}, Value: {1}, Date: {2}, Action: {3}", name, value, entered, action); }You'll find that you get an HTTP 404 error and { "Message": "No HTTP resource was found that matches the request URI…"} Yes, it's possible to pass multiple POST parameters of course, but Web API expects you to use Model Binding for this - mapping the post parameters to a strongly typed .NET object, not to single parameters. Alternately you can also accept a FormDataCollection parameter on your API method to get a name value collection of all POSTed values. If you're using JSON only, using the dynamic JObject/JValue objects might also work. ModelBinding is fine in many use cases, but can quickly become overkill if you only need to pass a couple of simple parameters to many methods. Especially in applications with many, many AJAX callbacks the 'parameter mapping type' per method signature can lead to serious class pollution in a project very quickly. Simple POST variables are also commonly used in AJAX applications to pass data to the server, even in many complex public APIs. So this is not an uncommon use case, and - maybe more so a behavior that I would have expected Web API to support natively. The question "Why aren't my POST parameters mapping to Web API method parameters" is already a frequent one… So this is something that I think is fairly important, but unfortunately missing in the base Web API installation. Creating a Custom Parameter Binder Luckily Web API is greatly extensible and there's a way to create a custom Parameter Binding to provide this functionality! Although this solution took me a long while to find and then only with the help of some folks Microsoft (thanks Hong Mei!!!), it's not difficult to hook up in your own projects. It requires one small class and a GlobalConfiguration hookup. Web API parameter bindings allow you to intercept processing of individual parameters - they deal with mapping parameters to the signature as well as converting the parameters to the actual values that are returned. Here's the implementation of the SimplePostVariableParameterBinding class:public class SimplePostVariableParameterBinding : HttpParameterBinding { private const string MultipleBodyParameters = "MultipleBodyParameters"; public SimplePostVariableParameterBinding(HttpParameterDescriptor descriptor) : base(descriptor) { } /// <summary> /// Check for simple binding parameters in POST data. Bind POST /// data as well as query string data /// </summary> public override Task ExecuteBindingAsync(ModelMetadataProvider metadataProvider, HttpActionContext actionContext, CancellationToken cancellationToken) { // Body can only be read once, so read and cache it NameValueCollection col = TryReadBody(actionContext.Request); string stringValue = null; if (col != null) stringValue = col[Descriptor.ParameterName]; // try reading query string if we have no POST/PUT match if (stringValue == null) { var query = actionContext.Request.GetQueryNameValuePairs(); if (query != null) { var matches = query.Where(kv => kv.Key.ToLower() == Descriptor.ParameterName.ToLower()); if (matches.Count() > 0) stringValue = matches.First().Value; } } object value = StringToType(stringValue); // Set the binding result here SetValue(actionContext, value); // now, we can return a completed task with no result TaskCompletionSource<AsyncVoid> tcs = new TaskCompletionSource<AsyncVoid>(); tcs.SetResult(default(AsyncVoid)); return tcs.Task; } private object StringToType(string stringValue) { object value = null; if (stringValue == null) value = null; else if (Descriptor.ParameterType == typeof(string)) value = stringValue; else if (Descriptor.ParameterType == typeof(int)) value = int.Parse(stringValue, CultureInfo.CurrentCulture); else if (Descriptor.ParameterType == typeof(Int32)) value = Int32.Parse(stringValue, CultureInfo.CurrentCulture); else if (Descriptor.ParameterType == typeof(Int64)) value = Int64.Parse(stringValue, CultureInfo.CurrentCulture); else if (Descriptor.ParameterType == typeof(decimal)) value = decimal.Parse(stringValue, CultureInfo.CurrentCulture); else if (Descriptor.ParameterType == typeof(double)) value = double.Parse(stringValue, CultureInfo.CurrentCulture); else if (Descriptor.ParameterType == typeof(DateTime)) value = DateTime.Parse(stringValue, CultureInfo.CurrentCulture); else if (Descriptor.ParameterType == typeof(bool)) { value = false; if (stringValue == "true" || stringValue == "on" || stringValue == "1") value = true; } else value = stringValue; return value; } /// <summary> /// Read and cache the request body /// </summary> /// <param name="request"></param> /// <returns></returns> private NameValueCollection TryReadBody(HttpRequestMessage request) { object result = null; // try to read out of cache first if (!request.Properties.TryGetValue(MultipleBodyParameters, out result)) { // parsing the string like firstname=Hongmei&lastname=Ge result = request.Content.ReadAsFormDataAsync().Result; request.Properties.Add(MultipleBodyParameters, result); } return result as NameValueCollection; } private struct AsyncVoid { } }   The ExecuteBindingAsync method is fired for each parameter that is mapped and sent for conversion. This custom binding is fired only if the incoming parameter is a simple type (that gets defined later when I hook up the binding), so this binding never fires on complex types or if the first type is not a simple type. For the first parameter of a request the Binding first reads the request body into a NameValueCollection and caches that in the request.Properties collection. The request body can only be read once, so the first parameter request reads it and then caches it. Subsequent parameters then use the cached POST value collection. Once the form collection is available the value of the parameter is read, and the value is translated into the target type requested by the Descriptor. SetValue writes out the value to be mapped. Once you have the ParameterBinding in place, the binding has to be assigned. This is done along with all other Web API configuration tasks at application startup in global.asax's Application_Start:GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.ParameterBindingRules .Insert(0, (HttpParameterDescriptor descriptor) => { var supportedMethods = descriptor.ActionDescriptor.SupportedHttpMethods; // Only apply this binder on POST and PUT operations if (supportedMethods.Contains(HttpMethod.Post) || supportedMethods.Contains(HttpMethod.Put)) { var supportedTypes = new Type[] { typeof(string), typeof(int), typeof(decimal), typeof(double), typeof(bool), typeof(DateTime) }; if (supportedTypes.Where(typ => typ == descriptor.ParameterType).Count() > 0) return new SimplePostVariableParameterBinding(descriptor); } // let the default bindings do their work return null; });   The ParameterBindingRules.Insert method takes a delegate that checks which type of requests it should handle. The logic here checks whether the request is POST or PUT and whether the parameter type is a simple type that is supported. Web API calls this delegate once for each method signature it tries to map and the delegate returns null to indicate it's not handling this parameter, or it returns a new parameter binding instance - in this case the SimplePostVariableParameterBinding. Once the parameter binding and this hook up code is in place, you can now pass simple POST values to methods with simple parameters. The examples I showed above should now work in addition to the standard bindings. Summary Clearly this is not easy to discover. I spent quite a bit of time digging through the Web API source trying to figure this out on my own without much luck. It took Hong Mei at Micrsoft to provide a base example as I asked around so I can't take credit for this solution :-). But once you know where to look, Web API is brilliantly extensible to make it relatively easy to customize the parameter behavior. I'm very stoked that this got resolved  - in the last two months I've had two customers with projects that decided not to use Web API in AJAX heavy SPA applications because this POST variable mapping wasn't available. This might actually change their mind to still switch back and take advantage of the many great features in Web API. I too frequently use plain POST variables for communicating with server AJAX handlers and while I could have worked around this (with untyped JObject or the Form collection mostly), having proper POST to parameter mapping makes things much easier. I said this in my last post on POST data and say it again here: I think POST to method parameter mapping should have been shipped in the box with Web API, because without knowing about this limitation the expectation is that simple POST variables map to parameters just like query string values do. I hope Microsoft considers including this type of functionality natively in the next version of Web API natively or at least as a built-in HttpParameterBinding that can be just added. This is especially true, since this binding doesn't affect existing bindings. Resources SimplePostVariableParameterBinding Source on GitHub Global.asax hookup source Mapping URL Encoded Post Values in  ASP.NET Web API© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in Web Api  AJAX   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • Does a mobile app need more access than the public API of a site?

    - by Iain
    I have a site with a public API, and some mobile app developers have been brought in to produce an iPhone app for the site. They insist they need to see the database schema, but as I understand it, they should only need access to the documented public API. Am I right? Is there something I've missed? I've told them that if there's a feature missing or data they require I can extend the API so that they can access it. I thought a web service API held to much the same principles as OOP object API's, in that the implementation details should be hidden as much as possible. I'm not a mobile app developer so if there is something I don't quite see then please let me know. Any insight or help will be much appreciated.

    Read the article

  • New Features in ASP.NET Web API 2 - Part I

    - by dwahlin
    I’m a big fan of ASP.NET Web API. It provides a quick yet powerful way to build RESTful HTTP services that can easily be consumed by a variety of clients. While it’s simple to get started using, it has a wealth of features such as filters, formatters, and message handlers that can be used to extend it when needed. In this post I’m going to provide a quick walk-through of some of the key new features in version 2. I’ll focus on some two of my favorite features that are related to routing and HTTP responses and cover additional features in a future post.   Attribute Routing Routing has been a core feature of Web API since it’s initial release and something that’s built into new Web API projects out-of-the-box. However, there are a few scenarios where defining routes can be challenging such as nested routes (more on that in a moment) and any situation where a lot of custom routes have to be defined. For this example, let’s assume that you’d like to define the following nested route:   /customers/1/orders   This type of route would select a customer with an Id of 1 and then return all of their orders. Defining this type of route in the standard WebApiConfig class is certainly possible, but it isn’t the easiest thing to do for people who don’t understand routing well. Here’s an example of how the route shown above could be defined:   public static class WebApiConfig { public static void Register(HttpConfiguration config) { config.Routes.MapHttpRoute( name: "CustomerOrdersApiGet", routeTemplate: "api/customers/{custID}/orders", defaults: new { custID = 0, controller = "Customers", action = "Orders" } ); config.Routes.MapHttpRoute( name: "DefaultApi", routeTemplate: "api/{controller}/{id}", defaults: new { id = RouteParameter.Optional } ); GlobalConfiguration.Configuration.Formatters.Insert(0, new JsonpFormatter()); } } .csharpcode, .csharpcode pre { font-size: small; color: black; font-family: consolas, "Courier New", courier, monospace; background-color: #ffffff; /*white-space: pre;*/ } .csharpcode pre { margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .rem { color: #008000; } .csharpcode .kwrd { color: #0000ff; } .csharpcode .str { color: #006080; } .csharpcode .op { color: #0000c0; } .csharpcode .preproc { color: #cc6633; } .csharpcode .asp { background-color: #ffff00; } .csharpcode .html { color: #800000; } .csharpcode .attr { color: #ff0000; } .csharpcode .alt { background-color: #f4f4f4; width: 100%; margin: 0em; } .csharpcode .lnum { color: #606060; }   With attribute based routing, defining these types of nested routes is greatly simplified. To get started you first need to make a call to the new MapHttpAttributeRoutes() method in the standard WebApiConfig class (or a custom class that you may have created that defines your routes) as shown next:   public static class WebApiConfig { public static void Register(HttpConfiguration config) { // Allow for attribute based routes config.MapHttpAttributeRoutes(); config.Routes.MapHttpRoute( name: "DefaultApi", routeTemplate: "api/{controller}/{id}", defaults: new { id = RouteParameter.Optional } ); } } Once attribute based routes are configured, you can apply the Route attribute to one or more controller actions. Here’s an example:   [HttpGet] [Route("customers/{custId:int}/orders")] public List<Order> Orders(int custId) { var orders = _Repository.GetOrders(custId); if (orders == null) { throw new HttpResponseException(new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.NotFound)); } return orders; }   This example maps the custId route parameter to the custId parameter in the Orders() method and also ensures that the route parameter is typed as an integer. The Orders() method can be called using the following route: /customers/2/orders   While this is extremely easy to use and gets the job done, it doesn’t include the default “api” string on the front of the route that you might be used to seeing. You could add “api” in front of the route and make it “api/customers/{custId:int}/orders” but then you’d have to repeat that across other attribute-based routes as well. To simply this type of task you can add the RoutePrefix attribute above the controller class as shown next so that “api” (or whatever the custom starting point of your route is) is applied to all attribute routes: [RoutePrefix("api")] public class CustomersController : ApiController { [HttpGet] [Route("customers/{custId:int}/orders")] public List<Order> Orders(int custId) { var orders = _Repository.GetOrders(custId); if (orders == null) { throw new HttpResponseException(new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.NotFound)); } return orders; } }   There’s much more that you can do with attribute-based routing in ASP.NET. Check out the following post by Mike Wasson for more details.   Returning Responses with IHttpActionResult The first version of Web API provided a way to return custom HttpResponseMessage objects which were pretty easy to use overall. However, Web API 2 now wraps some of the functionality available in version 1 to simplify the process even more. A new interface named IHttpActionResult (similar to ActionResult in ASP.NET MVC) has been introduced which can be used as the return type for Web API controller actions. To return a custom response you can use new helper methods exposed through ApiController such as: Ok NotFound Exception Unauthorized BadRequest Conflict Redirect InvalidModelState Here’s an example of how IHttpActionResult and the helper methods can be used to cleanup code. This is the typical way to return a custom HTTP response in version 1:   public HttpResponseMessage Delete(int id) { var status = _Repository.DeleteCustomer(id); if (status) { return new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.OK); } else { throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.NotFound); } } With version 2 we can replace HttpResponseMessage with IHttpActionResult and simplify the code quite a bit:   public IHttpActionResult Delete(int id) { var status = _Repository.DeleteCustomer(id); if (status) { //return new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.OK); return Ok(); } else { //throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.NotFound); return NotFound(); } } You can also cleanup post (insert) operations as well using the helper methods. Here’s a version 1 post action:   public HttpResponseMessage Post([FromBody]Customer cust) { var newCust = _Repository.InsertCustomer(cust); if (newCust != null) { var msg = new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.Created); msg.Headers.Location = new Uri(Request.RequestUri + newCust.ID.ToString()); return msg; } else { throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.Conflict); } } This is what the code looks like in version 2:   public IHttpActionResult Post([FromBody]Customer cust) { var newCust = _Repository.InsertCustomer(cust); if (newCust != null) { return Created<Customer>(Request.RequestUri + newCust.ID.ToString(), newCust); } else { return Conflict(); } } More details on IHttpActionResult and the different helper methods provided by the ApiController base class can be found here. Conclusion Although there are several additional features available in Web API 2 that I could cover (CORS support for example), this post focused on two of my favorites features. If you have .NET 4.5.1 available then I definitely recommend checking the new features out. Additional articles that cover features in ASP.NET Web API 2 can be found here.

    Read the article

  • Delicious API and Yahoo oAuth in .NET

    - by Khash
    The fact that Delicious has two sets of API authentications one with username and password and one with oAuth told me something about things I was going to experience and I wasn't wrong. Unfortunately I have to deal with both APIs now and am unsuccessful getting through the first hurdle of API v2 (Yahoo oAuth). Here is a code snippet (I'm using OpenSocial in this example http://code.google.com/p/opensocial-net-client) public static string GetRequestToken(string callbackUrl) { string normaluri; string normaluriparam; OAuthBase oAuth = new OAuthBase(); string nonce = oAuth.GenerateNonce(); string timeStamp = oAuth.GenerateTimeStamp(); string sig = oAuth.GenerateSignature(new Uri(TOKEN_URL), ConfigurationManager.AppSettings[CONSUMER_KEY], ConfigurationManager.AppSettings[SECRET_KEY], string.Empty, string.Empty, "GET", timeStamp, nonce, OAuthBase.SignatureTypes.HMACSHA1, out normaluri, out normaluriparam); sig = HttpUtility.UrlEncode(sig); string result = HttpClient.Get(TOKEN_URL, new { oauth_nonce = nonce, oauth_timestamp = timeStamp, oauth_consumer_key = ConfigurationManager.AppSettings[CONSUMER_KEY], oauth_signature_method = "HMAC-SHA1", oauth_signature = sig, oauth_version = "1.0", oauth_callback = callbackUrl }); return result; } It seems it doesn't matter if I follow instructions at http://delicious.com/help/oauthapi myself of leave it to OpenSocial, I get an "401 Unauthorized" from the server with no further info. I can see many people have the same issue but couldn't find any resolution.

    Read the article

  • Similar alternatives to Delicious that do not require Yahoo! account

    - by demian
    I love using Delicious and share the same PC as my girlfriend. When my she logs into her Yahoo! email account, I need to log out of my Delicious account because its tied to my Yahoo! login. So because of that, I can't use Delicious as a social bookmarking service. I love all its features and need an alternative that also uses Firefox addon integration and tagging. I've tried diigo.com but tagging is annoying. You can store your URL under your own tags but you don't have a clear way to later browse your tags in the Firefox addon. (The delicious approach is way much better and simple). Any suggestion of any service?

    Read the article

  • How best do you represent a bi-directional sync in a REST api?

    - by Edward M Smith
    Assuming a system where there's a Web Application with a resource, and a reference to a remote application with another similar resource, how do you represent a bi-directional sync action which synchronizes the 'local' resource with the 'remote' resource? Example: I have an API that represents a todo list. GET/POST/PUT/DELETE /todos/, etc. That API can reference remote TODO services. GET/POST/PUT/DELETE /todo_services/, etc. I can manipulate todos from the remote service through my API as a proxy via GET/POST/PUT/DELETE /todo_services/abc123/, etc. I want the ability to do a bi-directional sync between a local set of todos and the remote set of TODOS. In a rpc sort of way, one could do POST /todo_services/abc123/sync/ But, in the "verbs are bad" idea, is there a better way to represent this action?

    Read the article

  • SSL on site which asks API via HTTPS

    - by Larry Cinnabar
    For example I have a site site.com. It has its own http json api: api.site.com. API has authorisation and it runs under https. Now, I need to make visualization of some functionality of json api - so I need to make a profile section on site.com: Authorisation form, and user profile section with actions. All actions will be done via cURL requests to https://api.site.com. Have I use SSL on site.com too?

    Read the article

  • Writing Unit Tests for ASP.NET Web API Controller

    - by shiju
    In this blog post, I will write unit tests for a ASP.NET Web API controller in the EFMVC reference application. Let me introduce the EFMVC app, If you haven't heard about EFMVC. EFMVC is a simple app, developed as a reference implementation for demonstrating ASP.NET MVC, EF Code First, ASP.NET Web API, Domain-Driven Design (DDD), Test-Driven Development (DDD). The current version is built with ASP.NET MVC 4, EF Code First 5, ASP.NET Web API, Autofac, AutoMapper, Nunit and Moq. All unit tests were written with Nunit and Moq. You can download the latest version of the reference app from http://efmvc.codeplex.com/ Unit Test for HTTP Get Let’s write a unit test class for verifying the behaviour of a ASP.NET Web API controller named CategoryController. Let’s define mock implementation for Repository class, and a Command Bus that is used for executing write operations.  [TestFixture] public class CategoryApiControllerTest { private Mock<ICategoryRepository> categoryRepository; private Mock<ICommandBus> commandBus; [SetUp] public void SetUp() {     categoryRepository = new Mock<ICategoryRepository>();     commandBus = new Mock<ICommandBus>(); } The code block below provides the unit test for a HTTP Get operation. [Test] public void Get_All_Returns_AllCategory() {     // Arrange        IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense> fakeCategories = GetCategories();     categoryRepository.Setup(x => x.GetCategoryWithExpenses()).Returns(fakeCategories);     CategoryController controller = new CategoryController(commandBus.Object, categoryRepository.Object)     {         Request = new HttpRequestMessage()                 {                     Properties = { { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, new HttpConfiguration() } }                 }     };     // Act     var categories = controller.Get();     // Assert     Assert.IsNotNull(categories, "Result is null");     Assert.IsInstanceOf(typeof(IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense>),categories, "Wrong Model");             Assert.AreEqual(3, categories.Count(), "Got wrong number of Categories"); }        The GetCategories method is provided below: private static IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense> GetCategories() {     IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense> fakeCategories = new List<CategoryWithExpense> {     new CategoryWithExpense {CategoryId=1, CategoryName = "Test1", Description="Test1Desc", TotalExpenses=1000},     new CategoryWithExpense {CategoryId=2, CategoryName = "Test2", Description="Test2Desc",TotalExpenses=2000},     new CategoryWithExpense { CategoryId=3, CategoryName = "Test3", Description="Test3Desc",TotalExpenses=3000}       }.AsEnumerable();     return fakeCategories; } In the unit test method Get_All_Returns_AllCategory, we specify setup on the mocked type ICategoryrepository, for a call to GetCategoryWithExpenses method returns dummy data. We create an instance of the ApiController, where we have specified the Request property of the ApiController since the Request property is used to create a new HttpResponseMessage that will provide the appropriate HTTP status code along with response content data. Unit Tests are using for specifying the behaviour of components so that we have specified that Get operation will use the model type IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense> for sending the Content data. The implementation of HTTP Get in the CategoryController is provided below: public IQueryable<CategoryWithExpense> Get() {     var categories = categoryRepository.GetCategoryWithExpenses().AsQueryable();     return categories; } Unit Test for HTTP Post The following are the behaviours we are going to implement for the HTTP Post: A successful HTTP Post  operation should return HTTP status code Created An empty Category should return HTTP status code BadRequest A successful HTTP Post operation should provide correct Location header information in the response for the newly created resource. Writing unit test for HTTP Post is required more information than we write for HTTP Get. In the HTTP Post implementation, we will call to Url.Link for specifying the header Location of Response as shown in below code block. var response = Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.Created, category); string uri = Url.Link("DefaultApi", new { id = category.CategoryId }); response.Headers.Location = new Uri(uri); return response; While we are executing Url.Link from unit tests, we have to specify HttpRouteData information from the unit test method. Otherwise, Url.Link will get a null value. The code block below shows the unit tests for specifying the behaviours for the HTTP Post operation. [Test] public void Post_Category_Returns_CreatedStatusCode() {     // Arrange        commandBus.Setup(c => c.Submit(It.IsAny<CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand>())).Returns(new CommandResult(true));     Mapper.CreateMap<CategoryFormModel, CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand>();          var httpConfiguration = new HttpConfiguration();     WebApiConfig.Register(httpConfiguration);     var httpRouteData = new HttpRouteData(httpConfiguration.Routes["DefaultApi"],         new HttpRouteValueDictionary { { "controller", "category" } });     var controller = new CategoryController(commandBus.Object, categoryRepository.Object)     {         Request = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Post, "http://localhost/api/category/")         {             Properties =             {                 { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, httpConfiguration },                 { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpRouteDataKey, httpRouteData }             }         }     };     // Act     CategoryModel category = new CategoryModel();     category.CategoryId = 1;     category.CategoryName = "Mock Category";     var response = controller.Post(category);               // Assert     Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.Created, response.StatusCode);     var newCategory = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<CategoryModel>(response.Content.ReadAsStringAsync().Result);     Assert.AreEqual(string.Format("http://localhost/api/category/{0}", newCategory.CategoryId), response.Headers.Location.ToString()); } [Test] public void Post_EmptyCategory_Returns_BadRequestStatusCode() {     // Arrange        commandBus.Setup(c => c.Submit(It.IsAny<CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand>())).Returns(new CommandResult(true));     Mapper.CreateMap<CategoryFormModel, CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand>();     var httpConfiguration = new HttpConfiguration();     WebApiConfig.Register(httpConfiguration);     var httpRouteData = new HttpRouteData(httpConfiguration.Routes["DefaultApi"],         new HttpRouteValueDictionary { { "controller", "category" } });     var controller = new CategoryController(commandBus.Object, categoryRepository.Object)     {         Request = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Post, "http://localhost/api/category/")         {             Properties =             {                 { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, httpConfiguration },                 { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpRouteDataKey, httpRouteData }             }         }     };     // Act     CategoryModel category = new CategoryModel();     category.CategoryId = 0;     category.CategoryName = "";     // The ASP.NET pipeline doesn't run, so validation don't run.     controller.ModelState.AddModelError("", "mock error message");     var response = controller.Post(category);     // Assert     Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest, response.StatusCode);   } In the above code block, we have written two unit methods, Post_Category_Returns_CreatedStatusCode and Post_EmptyCategory_Returns_BadRequestStatusCode. The unit test method Post_Category_Returns_CreatedStatusCode  verifies the behaviour 1 and 3, that we have defined in the beginning of the section “Unit Test for HTTP Post”. The unit test method Post_EmptyCategory_Returns_BadRequestStatusCode verifies the behaviour 2. For extracting the data from response, we call Content.ReadAsStringAsync().Result of HttpResponseMessage object and deserializeit it with Json Convertor. The implementation of HTTP Post in the CategoryController is provided below: // POST /api/category public HttpResponseMessage Post(CategoryModel category) {       if (ModelState.IsValid)     {         var command = new CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand(category.CategoryId, category.CategoryName, category.Description);         var result = commandBus.Submit(command);         if (result.Success)         {                               var response = Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.Created, category);             string uri = Url.Link("DefaultApi", new { id = category.CategoryId });             response.Headers.Location = new Uri(uri);             return response;         }     }     else     {         return Request.CreateErrorResponse(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest, ModelState);     }     throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest); } The unit test implementation for HTTP Put and HTTP Delete are very similar to the unit test we have written for  HTTP Get. The complete unit tests for the CategoryController is given below: [TestFixture] public class CategoryApiControllerTest { private Mock<ICategoryRepository> categoryRepository; private Mock<ICommandBus> commandBus; [SetUp] public void SetUp() {     categoryRepository = new Mock<ICategoryRepository>();     commandBus = new Mock<ICommandBus>(); } [Test] public void Get_All_Returns_AllCategory() {     // Arrange        IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense> fakeCategories = GetCategories();     categoryRepository.Setup(x => x.GetCategoryWithExpenses()).Returns(fakeCategories);     CategoryController controller = new CategoryController(commandBus.Object, categoryRepository.Object)     {         Request = new HttpRequestMessage()                 {                     Properties = { { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, new HttpConfiguration() } }                 }     };     // Act     var categories = controller.Get();     // Assert     Assert.IsNotNull(categories, "Result is null");     Assert.IsInstanceOf(typeof(IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense>),categories, "Wrong Model");             Assert.AreEqual(3, categories.Count(), "Got wrong number of Categories"); }        [Test] public void Get_CorrectCategoryId_Returns_Category() {     // Arrange        IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense> fakeCategories = GetCategories();     categoryRepository.Setup(x => x.GetCategoryWithExpenses()).Returns(fakeCategories);     CategoryController controller = new CategoryController(commandBus.Object, categoryRepository.Object)     {         Request = new HttpRequestMessage()         {             Properties = { { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, new HttpConfiguration() } }         }     };     // Act     var response = controller.Get(1);     // Assert     Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.OK, response.StatusCode);     var category = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<CategoryWithExpense>(response.Content.ReadAsStringAsync().Result);     Assert.AreEqual(1, category.CategoryId, "Got wrong number of Categories"); } [Test] public void Get_InValidCategoryId_Returns_NotFound() {     // Arrange        IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense> fakeCategories = GetCategories();     categoryRepository.Setup(x => x.GetCategoryWithExpenses()).Returns(fakeCategories);     CategoryController controller = new CategoryController(commandBus.Object, categoryRepository.Object)     {         Request = new HttpRequestMessage()         {             Properties = { { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, new HttpConfiguration() } }         }     };     // Act     var response = controller.Get(5);     // Assert     Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.NotFound, response.StatusCode);            } [Test] public void Post_Category_Returns_CreatedStatusCode() {     // Arrange        commandBus.Setup(c => c.Submit(It.IsAny<CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand>())).Returns(new CommandResult(true));     Mapper.CreateMap<CategoryFormModel, CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand>();          var httpConfiguration = new HttpConfiguration();     WebApiConfig.Register(httpConfiguration);     var httpRouteData = new HttpRouteData(httpConfiguration.Routes["DefaultApi"],         new HttpRouteValueDictionary { { "controller", "category" } });     var controller = new CategoryController(commandBus.Object, categoryRepository.Object)     {         Request = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Post, "http://localhost/api/category/")         {             Properties =             {                 { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, httpConfiguration },                 { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpRouteDataKey, httpRouteData }             }         }     };     // Act     CategoryModel category = new CategoryModel();     category.CategoryId = 1;     category.CategoryName = "Mock Category";     var response = controller.Post(category);               // Assert     Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.Created, response.StatusCode);     var newCategory = JsonConvert.DeserializeObject<CategoryModel>(response.Content.ReadAsStringAsync().Result);     Assert.AreEqual(string.Format("http://localhost/api/category/{0}", newCategory.CategoryId), response.Headers.Location.ToString()); } [Test] public void Post_EmptyCategory_Returns_BadRequestStatusCode() {     // Arrange        commandBus.Setup(c => c.Submit(It.IsAny<CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand>())).Returns(new CommandResult(true));     Mapper.CreateMap<CategoryFormModel, CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand>();     var httpConfiguration = new HttpConfiguration();     WebApiConfig.Register(httpConfiguration);     var httpRouteData = new HttpRouteData(httpConfiguration.Routes["DefaultApi"],         new HttpRouteValueDictionary { { "controller", "category" } });     var controller = new CategoryController(commandBus.Object, categoryRepository.Object)     {         Request = new HttpRequestMessage(HttpMethod.Post, "http://localhost/api/category/")         {             Properties =             {                 { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, httpConfiguration },                 { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpRouteDataKey, httpRouteData }             }         }     };     // Act     CategoryModel category = new CategoryModel();     category.CategoryId = 0;     category.CategoryName = "";     // The ASP.NET pipeline doesn't run, so validation don't run.     controller.ModelState.AddModelError("", "mock error message");     var response = controller.Post(category);     // Assert     Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest, response.StatusCode);   } [Test] public void Put_Category_Returns_OKStatusCode() {     // Arrange        commandBus.Setup(c => c.Submit(It.IsAny<CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand>())).Returns(new CommandResult(true));     Mapper.CreateMap<CategoryFormModel, CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand>();     CategoryController controller = new CategoryController(commandBus.Object, categoryRepository.Object)     {         Request = new HttpRequestMessage()         {             Properties = { { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, new HttpConfiguration() } }         }     };     // Act     CategoryModel category = new CategoryModel();     category.CategoryId = 1;     category.CategoryName = "Mock Category";     var response = controller.Put(category.CategoryId,category);     // Assert     Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.OK, response.StatusCode);    } [Test] public void Delete_Category_Returns_NoContentStatusCode() {     // Arrange              commandBus.Setup(c => c.Submit(It.IsAny<DeleteCategoryCommand >())).Returns(new CommandResult(true));     CategoryController controller = new CategoryController(commandBus.Object, categoryRepository.Object)     {         Request = new HttpRequestMessage()         {             Properties = { { HttpPropertyKeys.HttpConfigurationKey, new HttpConfiguration() } }         }     };     // Act               var response = controller.Delete(1);     // Assert     Assert.AreEqual(HttpStatusCode.NoContent, response.StatusCode);   } private static IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense> GetCategories() {     IEnumerable<CategoryWithExpense> fakeCategories = new List<CategoryWithExpense> {     new CategoryWithExpense {CategoryId=1, CategoryName = "Test1", Description="Test1Desc", TotalExpenses=1000},     new CategoryWithExpense {CategoryId=2, CategoryName = "Test2", Description="Test2Desc",TotalExpenses=2000},     new CategoryWithExpense { CategoryId=3, CategoryName = "Test3", Description="Test3Desc",TotalExpenses=3000}       }.AsEnumerable();     return fakeCategories; } }  The complete implementation for the Api Controller, CategoryController is given below: public class CategoryController : ApiController {       private readonly ICommandBus commandBus;     private readonly ICategoryRepository categoryRepository;     public CategoryController(ICommandBus commandBus, ICategoryRepository categoryRepository)     {         this.commandBus = commandBus;         this.categoryRepository = categoryRepository;     } public IQueryable<CategoryWithExpense> Get() {     var categories = categoryRepository.GetCategoryWithExpenses().AsQueryable();     return categories; }   // GET /api/category/5 public HttpResponseMessage Get(int id) {     var category = categoryRepository.GetCategoryWithExpenses().Where(c => c.CategoryId == id).SingleOrDefault();     if (category == null)     {         return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.NotFound);     }     return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.OK, category); }   // POST /api/category public HttpResponseMessage Post(CategoryModel category) {       if (ModelState.IsValid)     {         var command = new CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand(category.CategoryId, category.CategoryName, category.Description);         var result = commandBus.Submit(command);         if (result.Success)         {                               var response = Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.Created, category);             string uri = Url.Link("DefaultApi", new { id = category.CategoryId });             response.Headers.Location = new Uri(uri);             return response;         }     }     else     {         return Request.CreateErrorResponse(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest, ModelState);     }     throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest); }   // PUT /api/category/5 public HttpResponseMessage Put(int id, CategoryModel category) {     if (ModelState.IsValid)     {         var command = new CreateOrUpdateCategoryCommand(category.CategoryId, category.CategoryName, category.Description);         var result = commandBus.Submit(command);         return Request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.OK, category);     }     else     {         return Request.CreateErrorResponse(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest, ModelState);     }     throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest); }       // DELETE /api/category/5     public HttpResponseMessage Delete(int id)     {         var command = new DeleteCategoryCommand { CategoryId = id };         var result = commandBus.Submit(command);         if (result.Success)         {             return new HttpResponseMessage(HttpStatusCode.NoContent);         }             throw new HttpResponseException(HttpStatusCode.BadRequest);     } } Source Code The EFMVC app can download from http://efmvc.codeplex.com/ . The unit test project can be found from the project EFMVC.Tests and Web API project can be found from EFMVC.Web.API.

    Read the article

  • Adding AjaxOnly Filter in ASP.NET Web API

    - by imran_ku07
            Introduction:                     Currently, ASP.NET MVC 4, ASP.NET Web API and ASP.NET Single Page Application are the hottest topics in ASP.NET community. Specifically, lot of developers loving the inclusion of ASP.NET Web API in ASP.NET MVC. ASP.NET Web API makes it very simple to build HTTP RESTful services, which can be easily consumed from desktop/mobile browsers, silverlight/flash applications and many different types of clients. Client side Ajax may be a very important consumer for various service providers. Sometimes, some HTTP service providers may need some(or all) of thier services can only be accessed from Ajax. In this article, I will show you how to implement AjaxOnly filter in ASP.NET Web API application.         Description:                     First of all you need to create a new ASP.NET MVC 4(Web API) application. Then, create a new AjaxOnly.cs file and add the following lines in this file, public class AjaxOnlyAttribute : System.Web.Http.Filters.ActionFilterAttribute { public override void OnActionExecuting(System.Web.Http.Controllers.HttpActionContext actionContext) { var request = actionContext.Request; var headers = request.Headers; if (!headers.Contains("X-Requested-With") || headers.GetValues("X-Requested-With").FirstOrDefault() != "XMLHttpRequest") actionContext.Response = request.CreateResponse(HttpStatusCode.NotFound); } }                     This is an action filter which simply checks X-Requested-With header in request with value XMLHttpRequest. If X-Requested-With header is not presant in request or this header value is not XMLHttpRequest then the filter will return 404(NotFound) response to the client.                      Now just register this filter, [AjaxOnly] public string GET(string input)                     You can also register this filter globally, if your Web API application is only targeted for Ajax consumer.         Summary:                       ASP.NET WEB API provide a framework for building RESTful services. Sometimes, you may need your certain API services can only be accessed from Ajax. In this article, I showed you how to add AjaxOnly action filter in ASP.NET Web API. Hopefully you will enjoy this article too.

    Read the article

  • Internal and external API architecture

    - by Tacomanator
    The company I work for maintains a successful SaaS product that grew "organically" over the years. We are planning to expand the line with a suite of new products that will share data with the existing product. To support this, we are looking to consolidate business logic into a single place: a web service layer. The WS layer will be used by: The web applications A tool to import data A tool to integrate with other client software (not an API per se) We also want to create an API that can be used by our customers that are capable of using it to create their own integrations. We are struggling with the following question: Should the internal API (aka the WS layer) and the external API be one in the same, with security and permission settings to control what can be done by who, or should they be two separate applications where the external API just calls the internal API like any other application? So far in our debate it seems that separating them may be more secure, but will add overhead. What have others done in a similar situation?

    Read the article

  • Internal and external API architecture

    - by Tacomanator
    The company I work for maintains a successful SaaS product that grew "organically" over the years. We are planning to expand the line with a suite of new products that will share data with the existing product. To support this, we are looking to consolidate business logic into a single place: a web service layer. The WS layer will be used by: The web applications A tool to import data A tool to integrate with other client software (not an API per se) We also want to create an API that can be used by our customers that are capable of using it to create their own integrations. We are struggling with the following question: Should the internal API (aka the WS layer) and the external API be one in the same, with security and permission settings to control what can be done by who, or should they be two separate applications where the external API just calls the internal API like any other application? So far in our debate it seems that separating them may be more secure, but will add overhead. What have others done in a similar situation?

    Read the article

  • API design and versioning using EJB

    - by broschb
    I have an API that is EJB based (i.e. there are remote interfaces defined) that most of the clients use. As the client base grows there are issues with updates to the API and forcing clients to have to update to the latest version and interface definition. I would like to possibly look at having a couple versions of the API deployed at a time (i.e. have multiple EAR files deployed with different versions of the API) to support not forcing the clients to update as frequently. I am not concerned about the actual deployment of this, but instead am looking for thoughts and experiences that others have on using EJB's as an API client. How do you support updating versions, are clients required to update? Does anyone run multiple versions in a production environment? Are there pro's cons? Any other experiences or thoughts on this approach, and having an EJB centric API?

    Read the article

  • Is there an API for determining congressional districts?

    - by ardavis
    I'm looking to determine the congressional district based on an address my user is providing. This will avoid having the user to look it up themselves. Does an API of this sort exist? Note Through my attempts to find one, I've only come across these: http://www.govtrack.us/developers/api (not sure how to submit an an address or zip code however) The following resources are available in the API ...Bills and resolutions in the U.S. Congress since 1973 (the 93rd Congress). ...A (bill, person) pair indicating cosponsorship, with join and withdrawn dates. ...Members of Congress and U.S. Presidents since the founding of the nation. ...Terms held in office by Members of Congress and U.S. Presidents. Each term corresponds with an election, meaning each term in the House covers two years (one 'Congress'), as President four years, and in the Senate six years (three 'Congresses'). ...Roll call votes in the U.S. Congress since 1789. How people voted is accessed through the Vote_voter API. ...How people voted on roll call votes in the U.S. Congress since 1789. See the Vote API. Filter on the vote field to get the results of a particular vote... http://www.opencongress.org/api (seems to be a way to find congress information, but not districts) This API provides programmers with structured access to all the data on OpenCongress, everything from official bill info to news and blog coverage to user-generated votes on bills and much more... This API defaults to returning XML. All queries can also return JSON... https://groups.google.com/forum/?fromgroups=#!topic/opendems-discuss/CeKyi_aANaE (similar question, no resolution) I've been looking over Open Dems, and seeing what's exposed at this point and what isn't. I work with Democrats Abroad, and am interested in using stuff from the lab for their sites. I quickly looked over the Precinct API, which does both more and less than what I'd need. An ideal resource would be any way of translating addresses into CD at the very least (getting state district data would be good as well), since that would make it easier for DA's membership to make a difference in races like last month's NY26 race... Update I'm looking at the source for the govtrack.us website and the 'doGeoCode' function may be useful. view-source:http://www.govtrack.us/congress/members If no one has any suggestions, I will try to go off of what they are doing.

    Read the article

  • Google Maps API vs Multimap/Bing Maps API

    - by mdresser
    I want to know if anyone who has experience of using both the Google Maps API and the Multimap API can give a good reason as to why one is better than the other - or maybe a list of pros and cons? I will be working on a complete re-development of a site which currently uses the Multimap (Classic) API and want to consider the possibility of using Google Maps API instead of Multimap (now MS Bing), but I need a compelling reason to justify this decision. The site currently provides a search mechanism allowing users to search for addresses using postcode/partial postcode or city. The current system has a sqlserver database back-end containing full address details and also uploads (geocodes this information to Multimap with a daily scheduled task). I'm wondering if it's possible with the Google API to avoid the need for the daily upload and just use it's geocoding API instead (though this is limited by Google's restriction of a certain number of geocoding requests per day).

    Read the article

  • Sharing authentication methods across API and web app

    - by Snixtor
    I'm wanting to share an authentication implementation across a web application, and web API. The web application will be ASP.NET (mostly MVC 4), the API will be mostly ASP.NET WEB API, though I anticipate it will also have a few custom modules or handlers. I want to: Share as much authentication implementation between the app and API as possible. Have the web application behave like forms authentication (attractive log-in page, logout option, redirect to / from login page when a request requires authentication / authorisation). Have API callers use something closer to standard HTTP (401 - Unauthorized, not 302 - Redirect). Provide client and server side logout mechanisms that don't require a change of password (so HTTP basic is out, since clients typically cache their credentials). The way I'm thinking of implementing this is using plain old ASP.NET forms authentication for the web application, and pushing another module into the stack (much like MADAM - Mixed Authentication Disposition ASP.NET Module). This module will look for some HTTP header (implementation specific) which indicates "caller is API". If the header "caller is API" is set, then the service will respond differently than standard ASP.NET forms authentication, it will: 401 instead of 302 on a request lacking authentication. Look for username + pass in a custom "Login" HTTP header, and return a FormsAuthentication ticket in a custom "FormsAuth" header. Look for FormsAuthentication ticket in a custom "FormsAuth" header. My question(s) are: Is there a framework for ASP.NET that already covers this scenario? Are there any glaring holes in this proposed implementation? My primary fear is a security risk that I can't see, but I'm similarly concerned that there may be something about such an implementation that will make it overly restrictive or clumsy to work with.

    Read the article

  • Using an alternate JSON Serializer in ASP.NET Web API

    - by Rick Strahl
    The new ASP.NET Web API that Microsoft released alongside MVC 4.0 Beta last week is a great framework for building REST and AJAX APIs. I've been working with it for quite a while now and I really like the way it works and the complete set of features it provides 'in the box'. It's about time that Microsoft gets a decent API for building generic HTTP endpoints into the framework. DataContractJsonSerializer sucks As nice as Web API's overall design is one thing still sucks: The built-in JSON Serialization uses the DataContractJsonSerializer which is just too limiting for many scenarios. The biggest issues I have with it are: No support for untyped values (object, dynamic, Anonymous Types) MS AJAX style Date Formatting Ugly serialization formats for types like Dictionaries To me the most serious issue is dealing with serialization of untyped objects. I have number of applications with AJAX front ends that dynamically reformat data from business objects to fit a specific message format that certain UI components require. The most common scenario I have there are IEnumerable query results from a database with fields from the result set rearranged to fit the sometimes unconventional formats required for the UI components (like jqGrid for example). Creating custom types to fit these messages seems like overkill and projections using Linq makes this much easier to code up. Alas DataContractJsonSerializer doesn't support it. Neither does DataContractSerializer for XML output for that matter. What this means is that you can't do stuff like this in Web API out of the box:public object GetAnonymousType() { return new { name = "Rick", company = "West Wind", entered= DateTime.Now }; } Basically anything that doesn't have an explicit type DataContractJsonSerializer will not let you return. FWIW, the same is true for XmlSerializer which also doesn't work with non-typed values for serialization. The example above is obviously contrived with a hardcoded object graph, but it's not uncommon to get dynamic values returned from queries that have anonymous types for their result projections. Apparently there's a good possibility that Microsoft will ship Json.NET as part of Web API RTM release.  Scott Hanselman confirmed this as a footnote in his JSON Dates post a few days ago. I've heard several other people from Microsoft confirm that Json.NET will be included and be the default JSON serializer, but no details yet in what capacity it will show up. Let's hope it ends up as the default in the box. Meanwhile this post will show you how you can use it today with the beta and get JSON that matches what you should see in the RTM version. What about JsonValue? To be fair Web API DOES include a new JsonValue/JsonObject/JsonArray type that allow you to address some of these scenarios. JsonValue is a new type in the System.Json assembly that can be used to build up an object graph based on a dictionary. It's actually a really cool implementation of a dynamic type that allows you to create an object graph and spit it out to JSON without having to create .NET type first. JsonValue can also receive a JSON string and parse it without having to actually load it into a .NET type (which is something that's been missing in the core framework). This is really useful if you get a JSON result from an arbitrary service and you don't want to explicitly create a mapping type for the data returned. For serialization you can create an object structure on the fly and pass it back as part of an Web API action method like this:public JsonValue GetJsonValue() { dynamic json = new JsonObject(); json.name = "Rick"; json.company = "West Wind"; json.entered = DateTime.Now; dynamic address = new JsonObject(); address.street = "32 Kaiea"; address.zip = "96779"; json.address = address; dynamic phones = new JsonArray(); json.phoneNumbers = phones; dynamic phone = new JsonObject(); phone.type = "Home"; phone.number = "808 123-1233"; phones.Add(phone); phone = new JsonObject(); phone.type = "Home"; phone.number = "808 123-1233"; phones.Add(phone); //var jsonString = json.ToString(); return json; } which produces the following output (formatted here for easier reading):{ name: "rick", company: "West Wind", entered: "2012-03-08T15:33:19.673-10:00", address: { street: "32 Kaiea", zip: "96779" }, phoneNumbers: [ { type: "Home", number: "808 123-1233" }, { type: "Mobile", number: "808 123-1234" }] } If you need to build a simple JSON type on the fly these types work great. But if you have an existing type - or worse a query result/list that's already formatted JsonValue et al. become a pain to work with. As far as I can see there's no way to just throw an object instance at JsonValue and have it convert into JsonValue dictionary. It's a manual process. Using alternate Serializers in Web API So, currently the default serializer in WebAPI is DataContractJsonSeriaizer and I don't like it. You may not either, but luckily you can swap the serializer fairly easily. If you'd rather use the JavaScriptSerializer built into System.Web.Extensions or Json.NET today, it's not too difficult to create a custom MediaTypeFormatter that uses these serializers and can replace or partially replace the native serializer. Here's a MediaTypeFormatter implementation using the ASP.NET JavaScriptSerializer:using System; using System.Net.Http.Formatting; using System.Threading.Tasks; using System.Web.Script.Serialization; using System.Json; using System.IO; namespace Westwind.Web.WebApi { public class JavaScriptSerializerFormatter : MediaTypeFormatter { public JavaScriptSerializerFormatter() { SupportedMediaTypes.Add(new System.Net.Http.Headers.MediaTypeHeaderValue("application/json")); } protected override bool CanWriteType(Type type) { // don't serialize JsonValue structure use default for that if (type == typeof(JsonValue) || type == typeof(JsonObject) || type== typeof(JsonArray) ) return false; return true; } protected override bool CanReadType(Type type) { if (type == typeof(IKeyValueModel)) return false; return true; } protected override System.Threading.Tasks.Taskobject OnReadFromStreamAsync(Type type, System.IO.Stream stream, System.Net.Http.Headers.HttpContentHeaders contentHeaders, FormatterContext formatterContext) { var task = Taskobject.Factory.StartNew(() = { var ser = new JavaScriptSerializer(); string json; using (var sr = new StreamReader(stream)) { json = sr.ReadToEnd(); sr.Close(); } object val = ser.Deserialize(json,type); return val; }); return task; } protected override System.Threading.Tasks.Task OnWriteToStreamAsync(Type type, object value, System.IO.Stream stream, System.Net.Http.Headers.HttpContentHeaders contentHeaders, FormatterContext formatterContext, System.Net.TransportContext transportContext) { var task = Task.Factory.StartNew( () = { var ser = new JavaScriptSerializer(); var json = ser.Serialize(value); byte[] buf = System.Text.Encoding.Default.GetBytes(json); stream.Write(buf,0,buf.Length); stream.Flush(); }); return task; } } } Formatter implementation is pretty simple: You override 4 methods to tell which types you can handle and then handle the input or output streams to create/parse the JSON data. Note that when creating output you want to take care to still allow JsonValue/JsonObject/JsonArray types to be handled by the default serializer so those objects serialize properly - if you let either JavaScriptSerializer or JSON.NET handle them they'd try to render the dictionaries which is very undesirable. If you'd rather use Json.NET here's the JSON.NET version of the formatter:// this code requires a reference to JSON.NET in your project #if true using System; using System.Net.Http.Formatting; using System.Threading.Tasks; using System.Web.Script.Serialization; using System.Json; using Newtonsoft.Json; using System.IO; using Newtonsoft.Json.Converters; namespace Westwind.Web.WebApi { public class JsonNetFormatter : MediaTypeFormatter { public JsonNetFormatter() { SupportedMediaTypes.Add(new System.Net.Http.Headers.MediaTypeHeaderValue("application/json")); } protected override bool CanWriteType(Type type) { // don't serialize JsonValue structure use default for that if (type == typeof(JsonValue) || type == typeof(JsonObject) || type == typeof(JsonArray)) return false; return true; } protected override bool CanReadType(Type type) { if (type == typeof(IKeyValueModel)) return false; return true; } protected override System.Threading.Tasks.Taskobject OnReadFromStreamAsync(Type type, System.IO.Stream stream, System.Net.Http.Headers.HttpContentHeaders contentHeaders, FormatterContext formatterContext) { var task = Taskobject.Factory.StartNew(() = { var settings = new JsonSerializerSettings() { NullValueHandling = NullValueHandling.Ignore, }; var sr = new StreamReader(stream); var jreader = new JsonTextReader(sr); var ser = new JsonSerializer(); ser.Converters.Add(new IsoDateTimeConverter()); object val = ser.Deserialize(jreader, type); return val; }); return task; } protected override System.Threading.Tasks.Task OnWriteToStreamAsync(Type type, object value, System.IO.Stream stream, System.Net.Http.Headers.HttpContentHeaders contentHeaders, FormatterContext formatterContext, System.Net.TransportContext transportContext) { var task = Task.Factory.StartNew( () = { var settings = new JsonSerializerSettings() { NullValueHandling = NullValueHandling.Ignore, }; string json = JsonConvert.SerializeObject(value, Formatting.Indented, new JsonConverter[1] { new IsoDateTimeConverter() } ); byte[] buf = System.Text.Encoding.Default.GetBytes(json); stream.Write(buf,0,buf.Length); stream.Flush(); }); return task; } } } #endif   One advantage of the Json.NET serializer is that you can specify a few options on how things are formatted and handled. You get null value handling and you can plug in the IsoDateTimeConverter which is nice to product proper ISO dates that I would expect any Json serializer to output these days. Hooking up the Formatters Once you've created the custom formatters you need to enable them for your Web API application. To do this use the GlobalConfiguration.Configuration object and add the formatter to the Formatters collection. Here's what this looks like hooked up from Application_Start in a Web project:protected void Application_Start(object sender, EventArgs e) { // Action based routing (used for RPC calls) RouteTable.Routes.MapHttpRoute( name: "StockApi", routeTemplate: "stocks/{action}/{symbol}", defaults: new { symbol = RouteParameter.Optional, controller = "StockApi" } ); // WebApi Configuration to hook up formatters and message handlers // optional RegisterApis(GlobalConfiguration.Configuration); } public static void RegisterApis(HttpConfiguration config) { // Add JavaScriptSerializer formatter instead - add at top to make default //config.Formatters.Insert(0, new JavaScriptSerializerFormatter()); // Add Json.net formatter - add at the top so it fires first! // This leaves the old one in place so JsonValue/JsonObject/JsonArray still are handled config.Formatters.Insert(0, new JsonNetFormatter()); } One thing to remember here is the GlobalConfiguration object which is Web API's static configuration instance. I think this thing is seriously misnamed given that GlobalConfiguration could stand for anything and so is hard to discover if you don't know what you're looking for. How about WebApiConfiguration or something more descriptive? Anyway, once you know what it is you can use the Formatters collection to insert your custom formatter. Note that I insert my formatter at the top of the list so it takes precedence over the default formatter. I also am not removing the old formatter because I still want JsonValue/JsonObject/JsonArray to be handled by the default serialization mechanism. Since they process in sequence and I exclude processing for these types JsonValue et al. still get properly serialized/deserialized. Summary Currently DataContractJsonSerializer in Web API is a pain, but at least we have the ability with relatively limited effort to replace the MediaTypeFormatter and plug in our own JSON serializer. This is useful for many scenarios - if you have existing client applications that used MVC JsonResult or ASP.NET AJAX results from ASMX AJAX services you can plug in the JavaScript serializer and get exactly the same serializer you used in the past so your results will be the same and don't potentially break clients. JSON serializers do vary a bit in how they serialize some of the more complex types (like Dictionaries and dates for example) and so if you're migrating it might be helpful to ensure your client code doesn't break when you switch to ASP.NET Web API. Going forward it looks like Microsoft is planning on plugging in Json.Net into Web API and make that the default. I think that's an awesome choice since Json.net has been around forever, is fast and easy to use and provides a ton of functionality as part of this great library. I just wish Microsoft would have figured this out sooner instead of now at the last minute integrating with it especially given that Json.Net has a similar set of lower level JSON objects JsonValue/JsonObject etc. which now will end up being duplicated by the native System.Json stuff. It's not like we don't already have enough confusion regarding which JSON serializer to use (JavaScriptSerializer, DataContractJsonSerializer, JsonValue/JsonObject/JsonArray and now Json.net). For years I've been using my own JSON serializer because the built in choices are both limited. However, with an official encorsement of Json.Net I'm happily moving on to use that in my applications. Let's see and hope Microsoft gets this right before ASP.NET Web API goes gold.© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2012Posted in Web Api  AJAX  ASP.NET   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >