I have a web api with the following routes:
routes.MapHttpRoute(
name: "DefaultGet",
routeTemplate: "api/{controller}/{id}",
defaults: new { controller = "Home", id = RouteParameter.Optional }
);
routes.MapHttpRoute(
name: "DefaultApi",
routeTemplate: "api/{controller}/{action}/{id}",
defaults: new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = RouteParameter.Optional }
);
These are two Actions inside a Controller:
public class UserController {
public HttpResponseMessage Get(int id) {}
public HttpRespnseMesseage GetDetails(int id) {}
}
The first route allows me to access the Get()-Method by "/api/User/4711" The second route allows me to access the GetDetails()-Method by "/api/User/GetDetails/4711"
This works.
But in addition, the Get()-Method can also be called by "/api/User/Get/4711" (and is listed in the automaticly generated documentation, too)
How can I make sure, that I can access the Get-Method by "/api/User/4711", but not by "/api/User/Get/4711"?
Note: I want to keep the default routes and do not want a solution that can only be achieved by removing my default routes and using route attributes instead
You're doing something quite strange: you're mixing up deafault RESTful style routing, with action based routing.
With your current configuraton, your second route will match any ULR like /api/User/XXX/4711 where XXX is anything. No matter if XXX is Get or anything else.
The only thing that you can do to avoid the second route to accept anything is to use route constraints. But, to do so, you must have a fixed set of rules. For example, if you only want to exclude Get you can do that with a regex constraint. But if you don't know the rules, of course, you cannot implement it.
Recommendation
As the OP finally decided himself, if you're using a RESTful API routing style it's much better to use routing attributes, available since Wep API v2. (In fact there was a Nuget package to support it on previous versions).
Related
I'm very confused about the design of my RESTful services!
If I was doing this using vanilla MVC3/4 then I would simply have action methods marked [HTTPGet] etc. and I could have multiple Get's per controller. I this way I would organise controllers by their "meta group".
I've looked at the Web API MVC4 template and it gives me the automatic translation from an Http GET to the Getxxx() method - but this implies a single Get per controller and organising controllers by object, rather than function...which seems to make some sense.
I see many posts on adding named routes - but this seems to break the natural model of Get, Post, Put, Delete. If I do that - then aren't I (in essence) just going back to vanilla MVC4?
Is there any impact on having lots of controllers?
Am I thinking
about this correctly?
Shortly,
Is there any impact on having lots of controllers?
No
Am I thinking about this correctly?
Generally yes.
Default WebAPI/MVc template uses routing that relays on prefixes and naming GetXXX, PostXX.
RouteTable.Routes.MapRoute(
"WithActionApi",
"api/{controller}/{action}/{id}"
);
But you can create your own custom routing with action names instead. Then you uses in URL name of your action method and as you've wrote Attributes to set HTTP Verbs like [HttpGet]
RouteTable.Routes.MapRoute(
"DefaultApi",
"api/{controller}/{id}",
new { action="DefaultAction", id = System.Web.Http.RouteParameter.Optional }
);
[ActionName("DefaultAction")] //Map Action and you can name your method with any text
public string Get(int id)
{
return "object of id id";
}
[HttpGet]
public IEnumerable<string> ByCategoryId(int id)
{
return new string[] { "byCategory1", "byCategory2" };
}
I am looking at using WebAPI to create a Restful API. I want to create a launch url to provide URLs to the other portions/entities of the API. The obvious place to do this is ~/api/ however I cannot seem to wire up a route that will not give a 403 result. Any ideas?
EDIT: Just to be a bit clearer. I know how the default routing works in WebAPI, I.E. if I create a CustomersController that inherits from ApiController I can get there using ~/api/customers. What I want is a step before that where I could go to ~/api/ and would get a result a bit like:
[
{ Title: 'Customers', Url: '~/api/customers' }
]
I want this as my understanding is that RESTful services are metadata (think that the term) driven (basically discoverable and provide links to other resources in result). So there should be a single source url that points to all other resources in the API.
All you need to do for this is to add a new route which handles ~/api specifically.
In your project you will notice in the Application_Start method in the Global.asax a call is made to WebApiConfig.Register(GlobalConfiguration.Configuration), the WebApiConfig class is included in your project in the App_Start folder (along with various other config classes). If you look at the implementation of the Register call you will see that's where the ~/api/controller route is actually setup i.e.
config.Routes.MapHttpRoute(
name: "DefaultApi",
routeTemplate: "api/{controller}/{id}",
defaults: new { id = RouteParameter.Optional }
);
In order to make ~/api discoverable all you need to do is introduce a new route before the default which handles any calls to ~/api e.g.
config.Routes.MapHttpRoute(
name: "DiscoverableApi",
routeTemplate: "api",
defaults: new { controller = "Discoverable", }
);
Then add an ApiController to handle that call e.g.
public class DiscoverableController : ApiController
{
// GET api/values
public IEnumerable<string> Get()
{
return new string[] { "/users", "/photos", "/history" };
}
}
If you don't want to hard-code your URLs you will most likely need to look at something like Reflection to enumerable all the available ApiController's and their reachable endpoints (i.e. actions).
Take a look at the Microsoft ASP.NET Web API Help Page package from NuGet. Out of the box you can create a list of all your API endpoints which are returned as an MVC View. However you could customise it to return Json instead. You can also configure it to hang off any route you want, i.e.
api.mysite.com/help
myapi.com/api
etc
The web api seems to be only suited for the standard use-cases.
But I want to do more complex routing but can't find documentation for complex routing.
If I have more controller, the routings gets more and more complicated.
Can i define several optional parameters with dependencies?
Like this:
/api/document/{par1}/{par2}
par1 & par2 should be optional but par2 should be only matched if par1 is present.
And are recursive parameters possible?
/api/documents/characteristics/{round/green/red-dots}
/api/documents/characteristics/{square/yellow}
/api/documents/characteristics/{square/yellow/flat}
/api/documents/characteristics/{square/yellow/flat/...}
Is there a detailed documentation for the web api routing? The microsoft tutorial is too basic...
I need more information about the routing.
I have two controllers and some trouble because two routings are quite similar, so the wrong route is taken. I can use [Action]-Attribute as a workaround, but this feels not right... I also have to consider the order of the routes. This is logical but is nowhere mentioned.
Is the web api only for simple rest api's?
Edit:
I tried this:
routes.MapHttpRoute(
name: "DefaultApi",
routeTemplate: "api/{mandant}/documents/{id}",
defaults: new { controller = "documents", id = RouteParameter.Optional }
);
//routes.MapHttpRoute(
// name: "DefaultApiWithAction",
// routeTemplate: "api/{mandant}/documents/{id}/{action}",
// defaults: new { controller = "documents" }
// );
I have two methods:
[AcceptVerbs("get")]
public HttpResponseMessage Get(int id)
[ActionName("file")]
[AcceptVerbs("get")]
public HttpResponseMessage filedownload(int id)
Now I have the problem, the file-action is triggered even if I comment out the second route and the normal get specific document method is not triggered because multiple actions... I tried the [NoAction] attribute but this is not working...
But why will the file-method be triggered if there is no action in the route-template? (Or if the second route is active, why will the normal get-document method not be triggered if there is no action in the url....)
I my current workaround is to set a default-action for all other methods, but this is not a good solution.
You can use routing constraints to set conditions on the routing in global.asax like:
routes.MapRoute(
"ApiRoute",
"api/document/{par1}/{par2}",
new {controller="Document", action="SomeMethod"},
new {par1 = #"\d+" }
);
In the last parameter you can specify regular expression that has to be matched for specified parameter for the route to be used. In the example above par1 is used for digits only, but you can use any regular expression, like:
routes.MapRoute(
"ApiRoute",
"api/document/{par1}/{par2}",
new {controller="Document", action="SomeMethod"},
new {par1 = #"(value1|value2|value3)" }
);
I need to create a url scheme like this
friend/{userid}/wishlist
where friend is the controller, wishlist is the view, and userid is the id of hte friend whose wishlist you would like to see.
I have setup a route like this
routes.MapRoute(
"FriendWishlist",
"friend/{userid}/wishlist",
new { controller = "WishList", action="FriendWishlist", userid = 123}
);
when i try to browse to /friend/123/wishlist i get the following error
A public action method '123' was not
found on controller
'GiffrWeb.Areas.Api.Controllers.FriendController'.
Routes in MVC are evaluated in the order they are declared. It sounds very much like you have declared your route below the default one:
routes.MapRoute(
"Default",
"{controller}/{action}/{id}",
new { controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
);
routes.MapRoute(
"FriendWishlist",
"friend/{userid}/wishlist",
new { controller = "WishList", action="FriendWishlist", userid = 123}
);
So the MVC framework is trying to match your URL /friend/123/wishlist first to the default route. Because it's all variables and everything has a default or is optional, it's guaranteed to match. It doesn't check if the controllers and actions exist and take the relevant arguments. You have a FriendController class - check. 123 action - it goes bang.
Simplest fix - declare the route above the default one (ie just swap these two statements) and it should work OK.
I might just add that it seems a little weird to have a URL that starts with /friend/ going to a WishList controller when you obviously have a Friend controller (your error message says so).
Finally, I can't recommend highly enough that if you introduce custom routing that you also test those routes thoroughly - as you have seen, the routing engine often might not do what you think it does. I recommend either the route testing stuff in MvcContrib or Brad Wilson's blog post.
I have a basic MVC 2 (RC2) site with one base-level controller ("Home"), and one area ("Admin") with one controller ("Abstract"). When i call http://website/Abstract - the Abstract controller in the Admin area gets called even though i haven't specified the Area in the URL. To make matters worse - it doesn't seem to know it's under Admin because it can't find the associated view and just returns:
The view 'Index' or its master was not found. The following locations were searched:
~/Views/Abstract/Index.aspx
~/Views/Abstract/Index.ascx
~/Views/Shared/Index.aspx
~/Views/Shared/Index.ascx
Am i doing something wrong? Is this a bug? A feature?
My friend and I were experiencing the same issue with Areas in ASP.NET MVC 2. We found a "hack" that, so far, seems to be working. For the tl;dr version, see the bottom of this answer.
You've probably got something similar to the following in your "Admin" area's "AdminAreaRegistration.cs" class:
// Web/Areas/Admin/AdminAreaRegistration.cs
public override void RegisterArea(AreaRegistrationContext context) {
context.MapRoute(
"Admin_default",
"Admin/{controller}/{action}/{id}",
new { action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional }
);
}
Thus, it should make sense that when you make a request for "http://website/Abstract", the "Admin_default" route does not match the request. So, by design, the MVC framework attempts to match the request against any other defined routes. If you used the MVC tooling within Visual Studio to create your web project, you'll have a "Default" route defined in your "Global.asax" file (at the root of your web project). It should look similar to this:
// Web/Global.asax.cs
public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) {
routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");
routes.MapRoute(
"Default",
"{controller}/{action}/{id}",
new {controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional}
);
}
The "Default" route succeeds in matching the request for "http://website/Abstract", with "controller" = "Abstract", "action" = "Index" (default value), and "id" = UrlParameter.Optional (default value). This is the correct, and intended, behavior... so far.
Now, the MVC framework will attempt to load the "Abstract" Controller. By design, MVC will search for a class called "AbstractController" that extends "Controller" anywhere within the web project's file/namespace hierarchy. It is important to note that a Controller's file location and namespace do not affect MVC's ability to find it; in other words, just because you've placed the "AbstractController" within a folder called "Areas\Admin\Controllers" and changed the namespace to be "Web.Areas.Admin.Controllers" instead of, say, "Web.Controllers", doesn't mean that MVC won't use it.
When MVC executes the "Index" action in "AbstractController" which, most likely, just returns "View()", then MVC gets confused because it doesn't know where to find the "Index" view. Because MVC has matched a non-area route (the "Default" route in Global.asax), it thinks the matching view should be located in non-area view folders. Thus you get the familiar error message:
The view 'Index' or its master was not found. The following locations were searched:
~/Views/Abstract/Index.aspx
~/Views/Abstract/Index.ascx
~/Views/Shared/Index.aspx
~/Views/Shared/Index.ascx
We, just as you, didn't want requests for "http://website/Abstract" to resolve to "Admin" area's "AbstractController"; only "http://website/Admin/Abstract" should work. I can't think of why anyone would want this behavior.
A simple solution is to delete the "Default" route in Global.asax, but this will break any regular non-area Controllers/Views. This is probably not an option for most people...
So, we thought we could restrict the set of Controllers that MVC would use for requests matched by the "Default" route in Global.asax:
// Web/Global.asax.cs
public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) {
routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");
routes.MapRoute(
"Default",
"{controller}/{action}/{id}",
new {controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional},
new[] {"Web.Controllers"} // Added this line
);
}
Nope. A request for "http://website/Abstract" will still use "AbstractController" within the "Admin" area, even though the "AbstractController"'s namespace is "Web.Areas.Admin.Controllers" and (clearly) not "Web.Controllers". This is thoroughly confusing; it seems like this white-list has no dicernable affect on MVC's Controller resolution.
- tl;dr answer starts here -
After some hacking, we figured out how to force MVC to only use Controllers within the white-listed namespace(s).
// Web/Global.asax.cs
public static void RegisterRoutes(RouteCollection routes) {
routes.IgnoreRoute("{resource}.axd/{*pathInfo}");
routes.MapRoute(
"Default",
"{controller}/{action}/{id}",
new {controller = "Home", action = "Index", id = UrlParameter.Optional},
new[] {"Web.Controllers"}
).DataTokens["UseNamespaceFallback"] = false; // Added this line
}
Set the "UseNamespaceFallback" key of the DataTokens dictionary on the "Default" route to false. Now, when we make a request for "http://website/Abstract", the "Default" route will still be matched (this is valid behavior!) but MVC will not use any Controller that is not within the defined namespace(s); in this case, only Controllers within the "Web.Controllers" namespace are valid. Finally, this is the functionality we were looking for! We can't figure out why this isn't the default behavior. Weird, huh?
Hope this helps.
Did you setup your routing correctly? When you use areas you have to manually change your routing code so that MVC looks in the right namespaces.
http://haacked.com/archive/2010/01/12/ambiguous-controller-names.aspx