# Who uses RESTful? **URL:** \ **Category:** Rails\ **Created:** [August 4, 2008, 10:11am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/who-uses-restful/144911 "2008-08-04T10:11:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 4\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![paulbutcher](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/a5b964/32.png) [@paulbutcher](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/paulbutcher)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2008, 10:11am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/who-uses-restful/144911/1 "2008-08-04T10:11:26Z")
I’m not into RESTful yet, as I haven’t understood it completely. So my question might fall back on that. I’m trying to learn it but I can’t see it will be useful for me. Who uses RESTful? I mean often an app is not that straightforward. A simple RESTful setup is more like an interface to the db, not a real world scenario. And often you will use plain html and not other format outputs, such as xml. A real app will have many different custom actions and solutions that breaks the RESTful setup, right? What’s your view on RESTful? ---
**Author:** ![paulbutcher](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/a5b964/32.png) [@paulbutcher](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/paulbutcher)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2008, 11:09am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/who-uses-restful/144911/2 "2008-08-04T11:09:12Z")
Kiran Soumya wrote: > Clean URLs. REST URLs represent resources and not actions. Yes that’s good. But does it really matter? And my point is that it might often be broken when you have all your custom solutions. At least that’s the case for me. Many web apps is not that simple that a RESTful interface will do it. RESTful is more a UI for interacting with the db. Correct me if I’m wrong. > Different Response Formats. REST controllers are developed in a way > that actions > can easily deliver their results in different response formats. > Depending on the requirements > of the client, the same action can deliver HTML, XML, RSS, or other And how often do you use that? And if you do use it it will be for a specific set of data which is really simple to implement for that simple purpose. > Less Code. The development of multi-client-capable actions avoids > repetitions in > the sense of DRY2 and results in controllers having less code. That’s a plus. ---
**Author:** ![paulbutcher](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/a5b964/32.png) [@paulbutcher](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/paulbutcher)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2008, 10:44am UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/who-uses-restful/144911/3 "2008-08-04T10:44:07Z")
If we want to make a distinction between REST- and non-REST-based Rails applications, we use the word traditional. Traditional does not mean old or even bad, it’s only used to make a reference to an equivalent non-REST concept. This comparison should help to better explain the new technology. Feature list of REST-based Applications makes clear: Clean URLs. REST URLs represent resources and not actions. URLs always have the same format: first comes the controller and then the id of the referenced resource. The requested manipulation is independent of the URL and is expressed with the help of HTTP verbs. Different Response Formats. REST controllers are developed in a way that actions can easily deliver their results in different response formats. Depending on the requirements of the client, the same action can deliver HTML, XML, RSS, or other data formats–the application becomes able to handle multiple client demands, cleanly and simply. Less Code. The development of multi-client-capable actions avoids repetitions in the sense of DRY2 and results in controllers having less code. CRUD-oriented Controllers. Controllers and resources melt together into one unit– each controller is responsible for the manipulation of one resource type. Clear Application Design. RESTful development results in a conceptually clear and maintainable application design. Reference document: [http://media.quilime.com/files/pdf/restful\_rails\_en.pdf](http://media.quilime.com/files/pdf/restful_rails_en.pdf) Regards, Kiran. On Aug 4, 1:11 pm, Pål Bergström [removed\_email\_address@domain.invalid](mailto:removed_email_address@domain.invalid) ---
**Author:** ![paulbutcher](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/a5b964/32.png) [@paulbutcher](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/paulbutcher)\ **Post date:** [August 4, 2008, 1:07pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/who-uses-restful/144911/4 "2008-08-04T13:07:39Z")
Hi – On Mon, 4 Aug 2008, kiranH wrote: > > and solutions that breaks the RESTful setup, right? What’s your view on > > RESTful? > > Different Response Formats. REST controllers are developed in a way > that actions can easily deliver their results in different response > formats. Depending on the requirements of the client, the same > action can deliver HTML, XML, RSS, or other data formats–the > application becomes able to handle multiple client demands, cleanly > and simply. That’s not specific to resource-routed controllers, though. You can use respond\_to and so forth with traditional routing. > CRUD-oriented Controllers. Controllers and resources melt together > into one unit– each controller is responsible for the > manipulation of one resource type. They can melt together, but it depends a bit on what your resource is and how it maps to its persistence mechanism (if it has one). Here’s some elaboration of some of this: [http://dablog.rubypal.com/2008/3/23/splitting-hairs-over-resource](http://dablog.rubypal.com/2008/3/23/splitting-hairs-over-resource) [http://dablog.rubypal.com/2008/4/24/splitting-hairs-over-resource-part-2](http://dablog.rubypal.com/2008/4/24/splitting-hairs-over-resource-part-2) David – Rails training from David A. Black and Ruby Power and Light: - Advancing With Rails August 18-21 Edison, NJ - Co-taught by D.A. Black and Erik Kastner See [http://www.rubypal.com](http://www.rubypal.com) for details and updates!