我正在构建一个允许客户端存储对象的服务器。这些对象是在客户端完全构造的，对象id在对象的整个生命周期内都是永久的。
我已经定义了API，以便客户端可以使用PUT创建或修改对象:
PUT /objects/{id} HTTP/1.1
...
{json representation of the object}
{id}是对象id，所以它是Request-URI的一部分。
现在，我也在考虑允许客户端使用POST创建对象:
POST /objects/ HTTP/1.1
...
{json representation of the object, including ID}
由于POST意味着“追加”操作，我不确定在对象已经存在的情况下该做什么。我应该把请求作为修改请求，还是应该返回一些错误代码(哪个)?
当前回答
也许是在游戏后期，但我在尝试创建REST API时偶然发现了这个语义问题。
为了稍微扩展一下wrkken的回答，我认为您可以根据情况使用409 Conflict或403 Forbidden -简而言之，当用户完全无法解决冲突并完成请求时使用403错误(例如，他们不能发送DELETE请求来显式删除资源)，或者如果可能做一些事情，则使用409。
10.4.4禁止403 服务器理解请求，但拒绝执行。 授权没有帮助，请求不应该重复。如果 请求方法不是HEAD，服务器希望公开 为什么要求没有被满足，它应该描述原因 对于实体中的拒绝。如果服务器不希望做出 此信息可用于客户端，状态代码404(不是 Found)可以代替。
现在，有人说“403”，就会想到权限或身份验证问题，但规范说，这基本上是服务器告诉客户端它不会这样做，不要再问了，这就是客户端不应该这样做的原因。
至于PUT vs. POST…当用户没有办法或不应该为资源创建标识符时，POST应该用于创建资源的新实例。当资源的标识已知时，使用PUT。
9.6 PUT ... The fundamental difference between the POST and PUT requests is reflected in the different meaning of the Request-URI. The URI in a POST request identifies the resource that will handle the enclosed entity. That resource might be a data-accepting process, a gateway to some other protocol, or a separate entity that accepts annotations. In contrast, the URI in a PUT request identifies the entity enclosed with the request -- the user agent knows what URI is intended and the server MUST NOT attempt to apply the request to some other resource. If the server desires that the request be applied to a different URI, it MUST send a 301 (Moved Permanently) response; the user agent MAY then make its own decision regarding whether or not to redirect the request.
其他回答
由于您提到使用post的对象创建请求包含对象的ID，因此应该使其成为幂等请求。只返回与成功创建请求完全相同的响应。幂等请求使api更简单，例如。现在客户不必担心两种不同的情况(成功，失败)。或者客户端可以安全地重试请求，以防在连接/服务器暂时宕机时出现问题。
我会选择422不可处理实体，当请求无效时使用，但问题不在于语法或身份验证。
作为反对其他答案的论据，使用任何非4xx错误代码将暗示它不是客户端错误，而它显然是。使用非4xx错误代码来表示客户端错误完全没有意义。
It seems that 409 Conflict is the most common answer here, but, according to the spec, that implies that the resource already exists and the new data you are applying to it is incompatible with its current state. If you are sending a POST request, with, for example, a username that is already taken, it's not actually conflicting with the target resource, as the target resource (the resource you're trying to create) has not yet been posted. It's an error specifically for version control, when there is a conflict between the version of the resource stored and the version of the resource requested. It's very useful for that purpose, for example when the client has cached an old version of the resource and sends a request based on that incorrect version which would no longer be conditionally valid. "In this case, the response representation would likely contain information useful for merging the differences based on the revision history." The request to create another user with that username is just unprocessable, having nothing to do with any version conflict.
为了记录，422也是GitHub使用的状态码，当您尝试按已使用的名称创建存储库时。
错误402，需要付款
例如，这个资源已经存在，但如果你给我足够的钱，我会删除当前的一个，给你:D
.．.但是看看mozilla在https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/HTTP/Status#client_error_responses上对状态码的定义
作为一个更严肃的答案，这里没有人提供，那451呢:由于法律原因无法使用。你不能“合法地(通过你自己制定的条款和条件)”让多人访问相同的帐户信息
422也是一个很好的选择，它是不可处理的实体 请求格式良好，但由于语义错误而无法执行。由于它是一个完全有效的请求，但由于它在语义上与另一个条目相等，所以不能遵循它。
I think for REST, you just have to make a decision on the behavior for that particular system in which case, I think the "right" answer would be one of a couple answers given here. If you want the request to stop and behave as if the client made a mistake that it needs to fix before continuing, then use 409. If the conflict really isn't that important and want to keep the request going, then respond by redirecting the client to the entity that was found. I think proper REST APIs should be redirecting (or at least providing the location header) to the GET endpoint for that resource following a POST anyway, so this behavior would give a consistent experience.
EDIT: It's also worth noting that you should consider a PUT since you're providing the ID. Then the behavior is simple: "I don't care what's there right now, put this thing there." Meaning, if nothing is there, it'll be created; if something is there it'll be replaced. I think a POST is more appropriate when the server manages that ID. Separating the two concepts basically tells you how to deal with it (i.e. PUT is idempotent so it should always work so long as the payload validates, POST always creates, so if there is a collision of IDs, then a 409 would describe that conflict).
也许是在游戏后期，但我在尝试创建REST API时偶然发现了这个语义问题。
为了稍微扩展一下wrkken的回答，我认为您可以根据情况使用409 Conflict或403 Forbidden -简而言之，当用户完全无法解决冲突并完成请求时使用403错误(例如，他们不能发送DELETE请求来显式删除资源)，或者如果可能做一些事情，则使用409。
10.4.4禁止403 服务器理解请求，但拒绝执行。 授权没有帮助，请求不应该重复。如果 请求方法不是HEAD，服务器希望公开 为什么要求没有被满足，它应该描述原因 对于实体中的拒绝。如果服务器不希望做出 此信息可用于客户端，状态代码404(不是 Found)可以代替。
现在，有人说“403”，就会想到权限或身份验证问题，但规范说，这基本上是服务器告诉客户端它不会这样做，不要再问了，这就是客户端不应该这样做的原因。
至于PUT vs. POST…当用户没有办法或不应该为资源创建标识符时，POST应该用于创建资源的新实例。当资源的标识已知时，使用PUT。
9.6 PUT ... The fundamental difference between the POST and PUT requests is reflected in the different meaning of the Request-URI. The URI in a POST request identifies the resource that will handle the enclosed entity. That resource might be a data-accepting process, a gateway to some other protocol, or a separate entity that accepts annotations. In contrast, the URI in a PUT request identifies the entity enclosed with the request -- the user agent knows what URI is intended and the server MUST NOT attempt to apply the request to some other resource. If the server desires that the request be applied to a different URI, it MUST send a 301 (Moved Permanently) response; the user agent MAY then make its own decision regarding whether or not to redirect the request.
