One App, two REST questions - Nested Ressources, meaningful

Rails
1

Hi everybody,

Thank you for reading this, may you can help me out here, because I
looked at many ressources and didn’t find a solution yet.

Thank you very much

regards

Rafael

First question

I have a two model app: vacancy, candidacy

  • vacancy has many candidacies
  • candidacy belongs to vacancy

How can I access a ressource directly, even if its a nested ressource?
How can I manage this, that creating a new candidacy can be done
without having a relation to a vacancy, so that having a vacancy isn’t
mandatory?
A cancidacy could be applied in relation to an existing vacancy or a
spontanous application, and how should then the REST ressources look
like, is there a DRY way to do it or do I actually have to create two
different forms?

What is working is this:

vacancies/10200-31/candidacies/new
but not
candidacies/new

I got this error:

ActionView::TemplateError (candidacies_url failed to generate from
{:action=>“index”, :controller=>“candidacies”} - you may have
ambiguous routes, or you may need to supply additional parameters for
this route. content_url has the following required parameters:
[“vacancies”, :vacancy_id, “candidacies”] - are they all satisifed?)
on line #6 of app/views/candidacies/new.rhtml:
3: <%= error_messages_for :candidacy %>
4:
5:
6: <% form_for(:candidacy, :url => candidacies_path(), :html =>
{ :method => :post, :multipart => true}) do |f| %>
7:
8: <%
9:

Second question

Is this the right way for meaningful URLs?

vacancy_path(vacancy.vacancy_number) =>>> vacancies/10200-31

and in the show action

def show
@vacancy = Vacancy.find_by_vacancy_number(params[:id])
end

Is this a good way to do it? Or do I have to make other settings in
the routes.rb, so that the app knows, which attribute is gonna be
submitted? (The attribute params[:vacancy_number] is used though)

My routes.rb looks like this

First, this is my routes.rb

map.resources :vacancies do |vacancy|
vacancy.resources :candidacies
end

map.connect ‘:controller/service.wsdl’, :action => ‘wsdl’

Install the default route as the lowest priority.

map.connect ‘:controller/:action/:id.:format’
map.connect ‘:controller/:action/:id’
end

2

On 6/17/07, Rafael [email protected] wrote:

Rafael

  • candidacy belongs to vacancy

How can I access a ressource directly, even if its a nested ressource?

Create a second route for it. Things behave a bit differently in edge
rails (rails 2.0) so it might help to prepare now:

OLD:
map.resources :vacancies do |v|
v.resources :candidacies # candidacies_url
end

NEW:
map.resources :vacancies do |v|
v.resources :candidacies # vanancy_candidacies_url
end
map.resources :candidacies # candidacies_url

Edge rails adds the parent name prefix to the nested routes. This way
you can have both without having clashing routes. Perhaps you should
use the :name_prefix option now.

def show
@vacancy = Vacancy.find_by_vacancy_number(params[:id])
end

Yup. Routes don’t care what db attribute is pulled.

–
Rick O.
http://lighthouseapp.com
http://weblog.techno-weenie.net
http://mephistoblog.com

3

Thank you very much, lets have a try :slight_smile:

4

Thanks Rick,

Unfotunately I get always the same error, as before:

Routing Error
no route found to match “/candicacies/new” with {:method=>:get}

may you have a hint

5

aahhh ;-( thanks! what a painful post :-D))

now it works, but next issue comes up,… you might know why…
why a normal link_to_remote doesn’t work anymore?

<%= link_to_remote(“Delete My Search Profile”, :url => {:action
=> :reset_searchcriteria}) %>

ActionController::RoutingError in Vacancies#index
Showing app/views/vacancies/list.rhtml where line #7 raised:
/usr/local/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/actionpack-1.13.3/lib/
action_controller/routing.rb:1266:in `generate’: No route matches
{:action=>“reset_searchcriteria”}

I get the same Error, when I try with a member route
map.resource :vacancies, :member => {:reset_searchcriteria => :get}

Any clue?

Thank you very much!

greetinx

Rafael

6

It’s a spelling error, likely in your link_to call. You have
‘candicacies’, not ‘candidacies’.

  • BD