# Question regarding controller actions (And a little bit of REST) **URL:** \ **Category:** Rails\ **Created:** [July 17, 2010, 12:31pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/question-regarding-controller-actions-and-a-little-bit-of-rest/191745 "2010-07-17T12:31:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![mffreire](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@mffreire](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mffreire)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 12:31pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/question-regarding-controller-actions-and-a-little-bit-of-rest/191745/1 "2010-07-17T12:31:48Z")
Hi Guys, I am developing a blog system with Rails and I have a question about the following matter: My client wants me to create an _approve_ and _disapprove_ action for the comments. So, I did create two actions in the rails comment controller called by a \* put\* method, since the only thing they do is change the _approved_ collumn at the database. I am still not familiar with REST, so I decided to ask what you would do in a situation like this. Another way I was thinking is create an action update and there I would handle if I get a params[:approve] or a params[:disapprove]. I know it is a quite simple question, but I did research, but I think I didn’t find the right keywords to look for it. Thanks for any inputs in advance. Marco Antonio ---
**Author:** ![mffreire](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@mffreire](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mffreire)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 1:59pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/question-regarding-controller-actions-and-a-little-bit-of-rest/191745/2 "2010-07-17T13:59:00Z")
I would try to use 2 radio buttons, or a select box with values: - Approved - Not approved - … other states Then, you embed the processing of these values in the UPDATE action. For a select box, this might help you to start: - \<%= select(:blogpost, "status\_id", Status.all.collect {|p| [p.name, p.id] }) %\> hph, patrick ---
**Author:** ![mffreire](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@mffreire](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mffreire)\ **Post date:** [July 21, 2010, 9:05am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/question-regarding-controller-actions-and-a-little-bit-of-rest/191745/3 "2010-07-21T09:05:21Z")
Thank you guys. Bill, you helped me a lot. That was exactly what I needed to hear. Well, I came here once again just to share this article that I found that answers my questions too. In case someone have the same question. [http://dathompson.blogspot.com/2008/07/restful-rails-passing-url-parameters.html](http://dathompson.blogspot.com/2008/07/restful-rails-passing-url-parameters.html) [http://dathompson.blogspot.com/2008/07/restful-rails-passing-url-parameters.html](http://dathompson.blogspot.com/2008/07/restful-rails-passing-url-parameters.html) Regards, Marco Antonio ---
**Author:** ![mffreire](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/m/90ced4/32.png) [@mffreire](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/mffreire)\ **Post date:** [July 17, 2010, 2:16pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/question-regarding-controller-actions-and-a-little-bit-of-rest/191745/4 "2010-07-17T14:16:34Z")
Hi Marco, On Sat, Jul 17, 2010 at 5:29 AM, Marco Antonio F. [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) wrote: > handle if I get a params[:approve] or a params[:disapprove]. > I think, in the end, you’re making a choice is between: /blog/23/comments/4/approve and /blog/23/comments/4?approve From a REST perspective, the latter is probably slightly more preferred. Fielding’s dissertation does not provide a prescription at this level of detail, focusing instead on the need for unique resource identifiers. In the sense that the resource itself is more clearly identified in your proposal, I would venture an opinion that it is more RESTful than your client’s proposal. But I wouldn’t get wrapped around the axle with a client on that point. From a code maintenance perspective,however, the latter is much more preferable in that it requires only one method (update) instead of two (approve/disapprove). Additionally, the Rails routing engine supports / generates the CRUD methods by default, whereas you will need to do extra work to support your client’s request. That reduced complexity translates to $$$ which, in my experience, typically engages clients instantly. HTH, Bill