[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [GMG-Devel] API proposal

From: Nathan Yergler
Subject: Re: [GMG-Devel] API proposal
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 18:21:54 -0800

Exact same URLs, using only HTTP to dispatch requests. I don't see any
reason to make it a different WSGI app, and something in me says "the
resource is the resource is the resource" -- whether I want HTML,
JSON, or XML back, there should be one URL to get that resource


2011/11/13 Christopher Allan Webber <address@hidden>:
> Great!  Thanks for this work, Nathan.
> Putting yours/Tryggi's goals aside and commenting directly on what you've 
> written, I
> have just one question in my somewhat sleepy state: do you anticipate
> the API being mounted as a separate wsgi app, in the same app but at a
> particular URL (like /api/), or run under all on the exact same URLs but
> using the request headers to indicate that it's acessing it via the API?
> Option #2 is probably easiest for now?  Curious what you think though.
> Thanks,
>  - Chris
> Nathan Yergler <address@hidden> writes:
>> So I've been thinking about this over the past few days, and today
>> managed to get some thoughts down in the wiki.
>> My goals may be somewhat different than Tryggvi's; my intention is to
>> create an API that allows non-browser clients to upload and retrieve
>> media from GMG instances, leveraging straight-up HTTP as much as
>> possible. The document is intentionally vague: I suspect that there
>> are lots of things we don't know yet.
>> I have thoughts about how to start development of this (and I think
>> starting to build it will be a great test of how it works; if I'm
>> 'right' it should feel easy :) ). But at this point I'd like to get
>> some feedback. Does it pass the smell test? Does it meet basic use
>> cases? Are there things that seem totally whacky to you?
>> Thanks for your patience, looking forward to feedback.
>> Nathan
>> 2011/11/11 Tryggvi Björgvinsson <address@hidden>:
>>> On 11/07/2011 12:04 AM, Tryggvi Björgvinsson wrote:
>>>> As discussed at the IRC meeting yesterday I promised to write up an API to
>>>> use as a springboard for nyergler to improve and work from. I wrote the
>>>> proposal (for a very specific scenario) on the wiki:
>>>> As you can see this is a really specific API which wasn't created with
>>>> MediaGoblin in mind and only for submission of files but could be useful to
>>>> launch the API discussion and work.
>>> After a discussion yesterday on #mediagoblin with paroneayea and Elrond, I
>>> found out that MediaGoblin will start to process files immediately after
>>> upload no matter what. This makes the claims/expiration idea useless so we
>>> came up with a better approach to API which isn't as use case specific,
>>> easier to implement and overall just cleaner. Instead of claiming files with
>>> callback URL/webhooks. The callback is provided as an optional variable on
>>> upload (when files are uploaded, the application uploading can send a URL
>>> for GMG to POST to when processing is finished).
>>> I have modified the wiki page accordingly and split the API up into two
>>> different APIs. One for submission, the other for Metadata. So we need to
>>> provide the upload+webhook POST option and then implement the callback JSON
>>> API.
>>> If the uploading application (the US) wants to add metadata to the file
>>> (such as a Creative Commons license) that should be possible through a
>>> different API.
>>> Hope this clears things up and avoids hurting in Nathan Yergler's brain when
>>> he tries to understand what I am trying to explain.
>>> /Tryggvi
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> devel mailing list
>>> address@hidden
>> _______________________________________________
>> devel mailing list
>> address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]