我不是在问这里已经问过的问题:
@PathParam和@QueryParam有什么区别
这是一个“最佳实践”或惯例问题。
什么时候使用@PathParam vs @QueryParam。
我能想到的是，这个决定可能是用这两者来区分信息模式。让我在下面说明我的LTPO -不完美的观察。
PathParam的使用可以保留在信息类别中，这将很好地归入信息树的一个分支。PathParam可以用于下钻到实体类层次结构。
然而，QueryParam可以保留用于指定属性以定位类的实例。
例如,
/ Vehicle /车?车主= 123
/ House /克?该区域= newengland
(category) ?instance
@GET
@Path("/employee/{dept}")
Patient getEmployee(@PathParam("dept")Long dept, @QueryParam("id")Long id) ;
vs / category (instance)
@GET
@Path("/employee/{dept}/{id}")
Patient getEmployee(@PathParam("dept")Long dept, @PathParam("id")Long id) ;
vs ?类别+实例
@GET
@Path("/employee")
Patient getEmployee(@QueryParam("dept")Long dept, @QueryParam("id")Long id) ;
我不认为这样做有一个标准的惯例。是吗?然而，我想知道人们如何使用PathParam和QueryParam来区分他们的信息，就像我上面举例的那样。我也很想知道这种做法背后的原因。
我个人使用的方法是“如果对用户来说书签包含这些参数的url是有意义的，那么使用PathParam”。
For instance, if the URL for a user profile includes some profile id parameter, since this can be bookmarked by the user and/or emailed around, I would include that profile id as a path parameter. Also, another considerent to this is that the page denoted by the URL which includes the path param doesn't change -- the user will set up his/her profile, save it, and then unlikely to change that much from there on; this means webcrawlers/search engines/browsers/etc can cache this page nicely based on the path.
If a parameter passed in the URL is likely to change the page layout/content then I'd use that as a queryparam. For instance, if the profile URL supports a parameter which specifies whether to show the user email or not, I would consider that to be a query param. (I know, arguably, you could say that the &noemail=1 or whatever parameter it is can be used as a path param and generates 2 separate pages -- one with the email on it, one without it -- but logically that's not the case: it is still the same page with or without certain attributes shown.
希望这能有所帮助——我很感激这个解释可能有点模糊:)
