When api.php was basically the only API in MediaWiki, calling it "the API" worked well. But now we've got a Parsoid API, Gabriel's work on a REST content API, Gabriel's work on an internal storage API, and more on the way. So just saying "the API" is getting confusing.
So let's bikeshed a reasonably short name for it that isn't something awful like "the api.php API". I'm horrible at naming.
How about just "the MediaWiki API"? That's the only proper external API core MediaWiki has, as far as I'm aware.
If anybody is planning to tack on something new, they should be the ones thinking about what to name that thing ;)
Definitely agree with this. It’s the only API that is part of core, so “MediaWiki API” makes sense. -- Tyler Romeo 0x405D34A7C86B42DF
From: Bartosz Dziewoński matma.rex@gmail.com Reply: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Date: August 6, 2014 at 9:52:34 To: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Bikeshedding a good name for "the api.php API"
How about just "the MediaWiki API"? That's the only proper external API core MediaWiki has, as far as I'm aware.
The Chosen One's API. In short: Tchopi :P
Do we really need to call it somehow? When you will say "api" 99% of people who know mediawiki a bit will go for api.php. Special naming should be used just for the other weird api's that nobody is ever going to use anyway.
Btw, why do we need to have them in secondary php files / entry points?
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Tyler Romeo tylerromeo@gmail.com wrote:
Definitely agree with this. It’s the only API that is part of core, so “MediaWiki API” makes sense.
Tyler Romeo 0x405D34A7C86B42DF
From: Bartosz Dziewoński matma.rex@gmail.com Reply: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Date: August 6, 2014 at 9:52:34 To: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Bikeshedding a good name for "the api.php API"
How about just "the MediaWiki API"? That's the only proper external API core MediaWiki has, as far as I'm aware.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
API vs REST/CONTENT API? If we end up exposing rest API via the same entry point, no reason of even calling it anything else. If we have a separate entry point (why?), we could call it REST API or CONTENT API, specifying that it is mostly for the rendered content as opposed to internal database data. On Aug 6, 2014 1:04 PM, "Petr Bena" benapetr@gmail.com wrote:
The Chosen One's API. In short: Tchopi :P
Do we really need to call it somehow? When you will say "api" 99% of people who know mediawiki a bit will go for api.php. Special naming should be used just for the other weird api's that nobody is ever going to use anyway.
Btw, why do we need to have them in secondary php files / entry points?
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Tyler Romeo tylerromeo@gmail.com wrote:
Definitely agree with this. It’s the only API that is part of core, so
“MediaWiki API” makes sense.
-- Tyler Romeo 0x405D34A7C86B42DF
From: Bartosz Dziewoński matma.rex@gmail.com Reply: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Date: August 6, 2014 at 9:52:34 To: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] Bikeshedding a good name for "the api.php API"
How about just "the MediaWiki API"? That's the only proper external API core MediaWiki has, as far as I'm aware.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 06/08/14 14:32, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) wrote:
When api.php was basically the only API in MediaWiki, calling it "the API" worked well. But now we've got a Parsoid API, Gabriel's work on a REST content API, Gabriel's work on an internal storage API, and more on the way. So just saying "the API" is getting confusing.
So let's bikeshed a reasonably short name for it that isn't something awful like "the api.php API". I'm horrible at naming.
How about "the action API"? The fact that it is organised in a hierarchy of actions distinguishes it from REST, which is organised as a hierarchy of objects. The term "action" also distinguishes it from RPC.
-- Tim Starling
On 6 August 2014 14:53, Tim Starling tstarling@wikimedia.org wrote:
On 06/08/14 14:32, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) wrote:
When api.php was basically the only API in MediaWiki, calling it "the API" worked well. But now we've got a Parsoid API, Gabriel's work on a REST content API, Gabriel's work on an internal storage API, and more on the way. So just saying "the API" is getting confusing.
So let's bikeshed a reasonably short name for it that isn't something awful like "the api.php API". I'm horrible at naming.
How about "the action API"? The fact that it is organised in a hierarchy of actions distinguishes it from REST, which is organised as a hierarchy of objects. The term "action" also distinguishes it from RPC.
[Relaying conversations at Wikimania.]
Yes, this is sensible. Let's certainly not call it "the MediaWiki API" given how many are planned.
J.
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:15 PM, James Forrester jdforrester@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, this is sensible. Let's certainly not call it "the MediaWiki API" given how many are planned.
"Core" seems a reasonable qualifier, though, no? Seems like the content API and a lot of other proposed interfaces are by definition outside the core. So why not MW core API or just core API for short?
Core API can be misleading since people may think other APIs are based on MW's API (i.e. It's core of other APIs) even though It's true in some cases but not necessarily for all.
Am I wrong?
Best
On 8/7/14, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 10:15 PM, James Forrester jdforrester@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, this is sensible. Let's certainly not call it "the MediaWiki API" given how many are planned.
"Core" seems a reasonable qualifier, though, no? Seems like the content API and a lot of other proposed interfaces are by definition outside the core. So why not MW core API or just core API for short?
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
tl;dr: It already is "the MediaWiki web API". A codename as well is fine.
Searching mediawiki.org, "web API" is almost as popular as "MediaWiki API", and some of the uses are correctly for extension APIs and Parsoid's API. So "the MediaWiki web API" is a descriptive name that requires minimal changes.
That doesn't preclude us giving it a cool codename: The MediaWiki web API, codename "Unicorns Are Go", ... Bots use "Jimbo", the MediaWiki web API, to.. Another possibility is Starbright, an homage to Messrs. Starling and Brion, and 80s Madonna. Whatever we use should have awesome ASCII art in http://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php
Some inline responses below.
Tim Starling wrote:
Note that Nemo bis changed the name from "MediaWiki API" to "WebAPI"
on the basis of disambiguation, in this revision:
I don't like smash words, WebAPI already sounds dated, and Mozilla uses it https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/WebAPI for advanced browser features so developers might think it describes ResourceLoader modules like mediaWiki.Api, mediaWiki.loader, etc.
https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=API
:Main_page&diff=644948&oldid=642646
I have previously suggested "web API" as a term to distinguish it from the set of PHP classes and hooks used by extensions. API stands for application programmer interface, and traditionally refers to functions and classes -- using the term for a non-RPC HTTP interface is really rather awkward.
Neither "MediaWiki API" nor "Web API" distinguishes it from the proposed REST API.
Using "MediaWiki REST API" for the latter works. Or cool codenames for both.
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 3:47 AM, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
"Core" seems a reasonable qualifier, though, no? Seems like the content API and a lot of other proposed interfaces are by definition outside the core. So why not MW core API or just core API for short?
But extensions also provide this API. api.php?action=echomarkread&all=true http://en.wikipedia.beta.wmflabs.org/w/api.php?action=echomarkread&all=true isn't part of core but is the same MediaWiki web API. Also see my signature below :)
Summing up, it seems like "action API" and "api.php" are the two contenders.
"api.php" is least likely to be confused with anything (only its own entry point file). But as a name it's somewhat awkward.
"action API" might be confused with the Action class and its subclasses, although that doesn't seem like a big deal.
As for the rest:
Just "API" is already causing confusion. Although it'll certainly continue to be used in many contexts.
"MediaWiki API", "Web API", and "MediaWiki web API" are liable to be confused with the proposed REST API, which is also supposed to be web-accessible and will theoretically part of MediaWiki (even though I'd guess it's probably going to be implemented as an -oid). "MediaWiki web APIs" may well grow to encompass the api.php action API, the REST API, and maybe even stuff like Parsoid.
"MediaWiki API" and "Core API" are liable to be confused with the various hooks and PHP classes used by extensions.
"JSON API" wouldn't be accurate for well into the future, and would likely be confused with other JSON-returning APIs such as Parsoid and maybe REST.
"Classic API" makes it sound like there's a full replacement.
All the code name suggestions would be making things less clear, not more. If it had started out with a code name there would be historical inertia, but using a code name now would just be silly.
I like "action API".
Sumana Harihareswara Senior Technical Writer Wikimedia Foundation
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) <bjorsch@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Summing up, it seems like "action API" and "api.php" are the two contenders.
"api.php" is least likely to be confused with anything (only its own entry point file). But as a name it's somewhat awkward.
"action API" might be confused with the Action class and its subclasses, although that doesn't seem like a big deal.
As for the rest:
Just "API" is already causing confusion. Although it'll certainly continue to be used in many contexts.
"MediaWiki API", "Web API", and "MediaWiki web API" are liable to be confused with the proposed REST API, which is also supposed to be web-accessible and will theoretically part of MediaWiki (even though I'd guess it's probably going to be implemented as an -oid). "MediaWiki web APIs" may well grow to encompass the api.php action API, the REST API, and maybe even stuff like Parsoid.
"MediaWiki API" and "Core API" are liable to be confused with the various hooks and PHP classes used by extensions.
"JSON API" wouldn't be accurate for well into the future, and would likely be confused with other JSON-returning APIs such as Parsoid and maybe REST.
"Classic API" makes it sound like there's a full replacement.
All the code name suggestions would be making things less clear, not more. If it had started out with a code name there would be historical inertia, but using a code name now would just be silly.
Mediawiki-api mailing list Mediawiki-api@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-api
As a heavy user, I generally just refer to the things api.php does as "the API". or "MediaWiki's web API" when I'm feeling verbose.
I'd be confused about the "action API" since I generally use it to "read" which isn't really "action" -- even though it corresponds to "action=query"
As for "the proposed REST API", I don't think that proposed things should affect the naming scheme of things we already know and love.
Also, I think that all bike sheds should match the color of the house to (1) denote whose bike shed it is and (2) help tie the yard together like furniture in a living room.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Sumana Harihareswara <sumanah@wikimedia.org
wrote:
I like "action API".
Sumana Harihareswara Senior Technical Writer Wikimedia Foundation
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) < bjorsch@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Summing up, it seems like "action API" and "api.php" are the two contenders.
"api.php" is least likely to be confused with anything (only its own
entry
point file). But as a name it's somewhat awkward.
"action API" might be confused with the Action class and its subclasses, although that doesn't seem like a big deal.
As for the rest:
Just "API" is already causing confusion. Although it'll certainly
continue
to be used in many contexts.
"MediaWiki API", "Web API", and "MediaWiki web API" are liable to be confused with the proposed REST API, which is also supposed to be web-accessible and will theoretically part of MediaWiki (even though I'd guess it's probably going to be implemented as an -oid). "MediaWiki web APIs" may well grow to encompass the api.php action API, the REST API,
and
maybe even stuff like Parsoid.
"MediaWiki API" and "Core API" are liable to be confused with the various hooks and PHP classes used by extensions.
"JSON API" wouldn't be accurate for well into the future, and would
likely
be confused with other JSON-returning APIs such as Parsoid and maybe
REST.
"Classic API" makes it sound like there's a full replacement.
All the code name suggestions would be making things less clear, not
more.
If it had started out with a code name there would be historical inertia, but using a code name now would just be silly.
Mediawiki-api mailing list Mediawiki-api@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-api
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I personally think "Action API" and "api.php" are both fine, and we probably don't have to select a single winner between them. Our documentation can refer to the "Action API (accessed via a URL ending in 'api.php')" and we can make #REDIRECTs as appropriate. --scott
Agreed with Aaron. When these proposed additional APIs are actually implemented, then we can start arguing about what to call them.
I know that I personally will continue to call the API the “core web API” or sometimes just the “web API”, if it is clear based on the context in which I am talking. -- Tyler Romeo 0x405D34A7C86B42DF
From: Aaron Halfaker ahalfaker@wikimedia.org Reply: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Date: August 15, 2014 at 11:05:13 To: Wikimedia developers wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org> Cc: MediaWiki API announcements & discussion mediawiki-api@lists.wikimedia.org> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] [Mediawiki-api] Bikeshedding a good name for "the api.php API"
As a heavy user, I generally just refer to the things api.php does as "the API". or "MediaWiki's web API" when I'm feeling verbose.
I'd be confused about the "action API" since I generally use it to "read" which isn't really "action" -- even though it corresponds to "action=query"
As for "the proposed REST API", I don't think that proposed things should affect the naming scheme of things we already know and love.
Also, I think that all bike sheds should match the color of the house to (1) denote whose bike shed it is and (2) help tie the yard together like furniture in a living room.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Sumana Harihareswara <sumanah@wikimedia.org
wrote:
I like "action API".
Sumana Harihareswara Senior Technical Writer Wikimedia Foundation
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) < bjorsch@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Summing up, it seems like "action API" and "api.php" are the two contenders.
"api.php" is least likely to be confused with anything (only its own
entry
point file). But as a name it's somewhat awkward.
"action API" might be confused with the Action class and its subclasses, although that doesn't seem like a big deal.
As for the rest:
Just "API" is already causing confusion. Although it'll certainly
continue
to be used in many contexts.
"MediaWiki API", "Web API", and "MediaWiki web API" are liable to be confused with the proposed REST API, which is also supposed to be web-accessible and will theoretically part of MediaWiki (even though I'd guess it's probably going to be implemented as an -oid). "MediaWiki web APIs" may well grow to encompass the api.php action API, the REST API,
and
maybe even stuff like Parsoid.
"MediaWiki API" and "Core API" are liable to be confused with the various hooks and PHP classes used by extensions.
"JSON API" wouldn't be accurate for well into the future, and would
likely
be confused with other JSON-returning APIs such as Parsoid and maybe
REST.
"Classic API" makes it sound like there's a full replacement.
All the code name suggestions would be making things less clear, not
more.
If it had started out with a code name there would be historical inertia, but using a code name now would just be silly.
Mediawiki-api mailing list Mediawiki-api@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mediawiki-api
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
_______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
tl;dr: "PHP action API"
I'm organizing content in the mediawiki.org API namespace, https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T105133 , and so back to this bikeshed from August 2014.
We do now have the extra APIs. https://en.wikipedia.org/api/ names them * PHP action API * REST content API
I don't know who came up with the first name. I like it, it straddles Brad Jorsch's
seems like "action API" and "api.php" are the two contenders.
I'm changing the API navigation accordingly, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:API but the shed isn't going anywhere :)
FWIW in writing documentation, I've found "the core API" is misleading because extensions add API modules to it. Is Wikidata part of "the core API" when only one wiki implements all its wbXXX modules? A lot of API clients rely on the extracts and pageimages modules, but they're not part of core.
Cheers,
it was twelve months ago... >>>>
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Tyler Romeo tylerromeo@gmail.com wrote:
Agreed with Aaron. When these proposed additional APIs are actually implemented, then we can start arguing about what to call them.
I know that I personally will continue to call the API the “core web API” or sometimes just the “web API”, if it is clear based on the context in which I am talking. -- Tyler Romeo 0x405D34A7C86B42DF
From: Aaron Halfaker ahalfaker@wikimedia.org Cc: MediaWiki API announcements & discussion < mediawiki-api@lists.wikimedia.org>> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] [Mediawiki-api] Bikeshedding a good name for "the api.php API"
As a heavy user, I generally just refer to the things api.php does as "the API". or "MediaWiki's web API" when I'm feeling verbose.
I'd be confused about the "action API" since I generally use it to "read" which isn't really "action" -- even though it corresponds to "action=query"
As for "the proposed REST API", I don't think that proposed things should affect the naming scheme of things we already know and love.
Also, I think that all bike sheds should match the color of the house to (1) denote whose bike shed it is and (2) help tie the yard together like furniture in a living room.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Sumana Harihareswara < sumanah@wikimedia.org
wrote:
I like "action API".
Sumana Harihareswara Senior Technical Writer Wikimedia Foundation
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) < bjorsch@wikimedia.org
wrote:
Summing up, it seems like "action API" and "api.php" are the two contenders.
"api.php" is least likely to be confused with anything (only its own
entry
point file). But as a name it's somewhat awkward.
"action API" might be confused with the Action class and its
subclasses,
although that doesn't seem like a big deal.
As for the rest:
Just "API" is already causing confusion. Although it'll certainly
continue
to be used in many contexts.
"MediaWiki API", "Web API", and "MediaWiki web API" are liable to be confused with the proposed REST API, which is also supposed to be web-accessible and will theoretically part of MediaWiki (even though
I'd
guess it's probably going to be implemented as an -oid). "MediaWiki web APIs" may well grow to encompass the api.php action API, the REST API,
and
maybe even stuff like Parsoid.
"MediaWiki API" and "Core API" are liable to be confused with the
various
hooks and PHP classes used by extensions.
"JSON API" wouldn't be accurate for well into the future, and would
likely
be confused with other JSON-returning APIs such as Parsoid and maybe
REST.
"Classic API" makes it sound like there's a full replacement.
All the code name suggestions would be making things less clear, not
more.
If it had started out with a code name there would be historical
inertia,
but using a code name now would just be silly.
Since the current REST API is available under "v1", my take is "the v0 API" :-)
Il 10/08/2015 08:52, S Page ha scritto:
tl;dr: "PHP action API"
I'm organizing content in the mediawiki.org API namespace, https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T105133 , and so back to this bikeshed from August 2014.
We do now have the extra APIs. https://en.wikipedia.org/api/ names them
- PHP action API
- REST content API
I don't know who came up with the first name. I like it, it straddles Brad Jorsch's
seems like "action API" and "api.php" are the two contenders.
I'm changing the API navigation accordingly, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Template:API but the shed isn't going anywhere :)
FWIW in writing documentation, I've found "the core API" is misleading because extensions add API modules to it. Is Wikidata part of "the core API" when only one wiki implements all its wbXXX modules? A lot of API clients rely on the extracts and pageimages modules, but they're not part of core.
Cheers,
it was twelve months ago... >>>>
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Tyler Romeo tylerromeo@gmail.com wrote:
Agreed with Aaron. When these proposed additional APIs are actually implemented, then we can start arguing about what to call them.
I know that I personally will continue to call the API the “core web API” or sometimes just the “web API”, if it is clear based on the context in which I am talking. -- Tyler Romeo 0x405D34A7C86B42DF
From: Aaron Halfaker ahalfaker@wikimedia.org Cc: MediaWiki API announcements & discussion < mediawiki-api@lists.wikimedia.org>> Subject: Re: [Wikitech-l] [Mediawiki-api] Bikeshedding a good name for "the api.php API"
As a heavy user, I generally just refer to the things api.php does as "the API". or "MediaWiki's web API" when I'm feeling verbose.
I'd be confused about the "action API" since I generally use it to "read" which isn't really "action" -- even though it corresponds to "action=query"
As for "the proposed REST API", I don't think that proposed things should affect the naming scheme of things we already know and love.
Also, I think that all bike sheds should match the color of the house to (1) denote whose bike shed it is and (2) help tie the yard together like furniture in a living room.
On Fri, Aug 15, 2014 at 3:50 PM, Sumana Harihareswara < sumanah@wikimedia.org
wrote: I like "action API".
Sumana Harihareswara Senior Technical Writer Wikimedia Foundation
On Thu, Aug 14, 2014 at 5:06 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) < bjorsch@wikimedia.org
wrote: Summing up, it seems like "action API" and "api.php" are the two contenders.
"api.php" is least likely to be confused with anything (only its own
entry
point file). But as a name it's somewhat awkward.
"action API" might be confused with the Action class and its
subclasses,
although that doesn't seem like a big deal.
As for the rest:
Just "API" is already causing confusion. Although it'll certainly
continue
to be used in many contexts.
"MediaWiki API", "Web API", and "MediaWiki web API" are liable to be confused with the proposed REST API, which is also supposed to be web-accessible and will theoretically part of MediaWiki (even though
I'd
guess it's probably going to be implemented as an -oid). "MediaWiki web APIs" may well grow to encompass the api.php action API, the REST API,
and
maybe even stuff like Parsoid.
"MediaWiki API" and "Core API" are liable to be confused with the
various
hooks and PHP classes used by extensions.
"JSON API" wouldn't be accurate for well into the future, and would
likely
be confused with other JSON-returning APIs such as Parsoid and maybe
REST.
"Classic API" makes it sound like there's a full replacement.
All the code name suggestions would be making things less clear, not
more.
If it had started out with a code name there would be historical
inertia,
but using a code name now would just be silly.
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Ricordisamoa ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org wrote:
Since the current REST API is available under "v1", my take is "the v0 API" :-)
That name sucks because it implies that the REST API is supposed to replace it.
I support Bob or leaving it as it currently is, with time we will simply start using "mediawiki" or "core api" more and more often.
Vito
2015-08-11 15:24 GMT+02:00 Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjorsch@wikimedia.org:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Ricordisamoa < ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org> wrote:
Since the current REST API is available under "v1", my take is "the v0 API" :-)
That name sucks because it implies that the REST API is supposed to replace it.
-- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Senior Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
No, no, old tech that needs to keep running is called "classic"! ;-)
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 2:24 PM Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjorsch@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Ricordisamoa < ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org> wrote:
Since the current REST API is available under "v1", my take is "the v0 API" :-)
That name sucks because it implies that the REST API is supposed to replace it.
-- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Senior Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Last night I tweaked the listing at https://en.wikipedia.org/api/ to read:
* Action API, providing rich queries, editing and content access. * REST API v1, mainly focused on high-volume content access.
The "PHP" prefix seemed to confuse some, thinking that it was a PHP-specific API.
Another suggestion was to call it "MediaWiki Action API", in the hope of getting better name recognition. However, both APIs have a claim to be MediaWiki APIs in the wider sense, so this distinction might only be meaningful in the short term.
Gabriel
On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 6:24 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) <bjorsch@wikimedia.org
wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 7:13 PM, Ricordisamoa < ricordisamoa@openmailbox.org> wrote:
Since the current REST API is available under "v1", my take is "the v0 API" :-)
That name sucks because it implies that the REST API is supposed to replace it.
-- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Senior Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Brad Jorsch (Anomie) wrote:
When api.php was basically the only API in MediaWiki, calling it "the API" worked well. But now we've got a Parsoid API, Gabriel's work on a REST content API, Gabriel's work on an internal storage API, and more on the way. So just saying "the API" is getting confusing.
So let's bikeshed a reasonably short name for it that isn't something awful like "the api.php API". I'm horrible at naming.
For what it's worth, https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/API:Main_page uses "Web API", as does https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/How_to_contribute.
Tim Starling wrote:
How about "the action API"? The fact that it is organised in a hierarchy of actions distinguishes it from REST, which is organised as a hierarchy of objects. The term "action" also distinguishes it from RPC.
A quick count at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php says that there are currently 52 &list=foo entries and 83 &action=foo entries. While these numbers are inflated due to installed extensions, I'm hesitant to present the MediaWiki Web API as an action API. Though you could perhaps argue that listing is just another action.
I tend to agree with the view of others in this thread that simply saying "the [{MediaWiki (core), Web}] API" is usually sufficiently clear.
MZMcBride
On 2014-08-06, 6:37 PM, MZMcBride wrote:
Tim Starling wrote:
How about "the action API"? The fact that it is organised in a hierarchy of actions distinguishes it from REST, which is organised as a hierarchy of objects. The term "action" also distinguishes it from RPC.
A quick count at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php says that there are currently 52 &list=foo entries and 83 &action=foo entries. While these numbers are inflated due to installed extensions, I'm hesitant to present the MediaWiki Web API as an action API. Though you could perhaps argue that listing is just another action.
;) ?action=query&list=* Technically speaking, listing *is* an action.
~Daniel Friesen (Dantman, Nadir-Seen-Fire) [http://danielfriesen.name/]
We could name it in honor of Jimbo. ;) On Aug 7, 2014 1:18 AM, "David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Call it "Bob". "Bob" is always a good name.
- d.
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
I prefer Bob.
On 07/08/14 08:40, Pine W wrote:
We could name it in honor of Jimbo. ;) On Aug 7, 2014 1:18 AM, "David Gerard" dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
Call it "Bob". "Bob" is always a good name.
- d.
On 07/08/14 02:37, MZMcBride wrote:
A quick count at https://www.mediawiki.org/w/api.php says that there are currently 52 &list=foo entries and 83 &action=foo entries. While these numbers are inflated due to installed extensions, I'm hesitant to present the MediaWiki Web API as an action API. Though you could perhaps argue that listing is just another action.
Like Daniel said, what you call "listing" is actually the query action.
I tend to agree with the view of others in this thread that simply saying "the [{MediaWiki (core), Web}] API" is usually sufficiently clear.
Note that Nemo bis changed the name from "MediaWiki API" to "WebAPI" on the basis of disambiguation, in this revision:
https://www.mediawiki.org/w/index.php?title=API:Main_page&diff=644948&am...
I have previously suggested "web API" as a term to distinguish it from the set of PHP classes and hooks used by extensions. API stands for application programmer interface, and traditionally refers to functions and classes -- using the term for a non-RPC HTTP interface is really rather awkward.
Neither "MediaWiki API" nor "Web API" distinguishes it from the proposed REST API. For someone using api.php every day, "the API" is clear enough, but if you are a mobile developer using the REST API every day, you need some other term to specify api.php.
-- Tim Starling
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 10:58 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
but if you are a mobile developer using the REST API
every day, you need some other term to specify api.php.
Is "api.php" unsuitable for some reason?
That itself is awkward to say, and to disambiguate between the actual file and the API accessed via the file "the api.php API" is even worse. So I started this thread to see if we could come up with something that isn't so awkward.
Well if we kill off XML and other funky formats we can call it "the JSON API" :)
-- brion
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 11:00 AM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) <bjorsch@wikimedia.org
wrote:
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 10:58 AM, David Gerard dgerard@gmail.com wrote:
but if you are a mobile developer using the REST API
every day, you need some other term to specify api.php.
Is "api.php" unsuitable for some reason?
That itself is awkward to say, and to disambiguate between the actual file and the API accessed via the file "the api.php API" is even worse. So I started this thread to see if we could come up with something that isn't so awkward. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
On 7 August 2014 11:23, Brion Vibber bvibber@wikimedia.org wrote:
Well if we kill off XML and other funky formats we can call it "the JSON API" :)
Except the other APIs will likely use JSON too, AIUI… :-)
J.
On Thu, Aug 07, 2014 at 11:23:26AM +0100, Brion Vibber wrote:
Well if we kill off XML and other funky formats we can call it "the JSON API" :)
Actually, we should call it the YAML API, to be more complete.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/api.php?format=yamlfm
On 8/7/14, 10:58 AM, David Gerard wrote:
but if you are a mobile developer using the REST API
every day, you need some other term to specify api.php.
Is "api.php" unsuitable for some reason?
I like "api.php" too, given that we refer to the old one as "query.php".
-- Legoktm
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 7:42 AM, Legoktm legoktm.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
I like "api.php" too, given that we refer to the old one as "query.php".
We should just go back to query.php and get rid of api.php so we can avoid all this confusion. /s
*-- * *Tyler Romeo* Stevens Institute of Technology, Class of 2016 Major in Computer Science
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Legoktm legoktm.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
I like "api.php" too, given that we refer to the old one as "query.php".
You are in a keynote session at OSCON introducing... which API?
Please think on a name that is meaningful for the 3rd party developers out there, not just for you. "api.php" alone won't work.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Quim Gil" qgil@wikimedia.org
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 1:42 PM, Legoktm legoktm.wikipedia@gmail.com wrote:
I like "api.php" too, given that we refer to the old one as "query.php".
You are in a keynote session at OSCON introducing... which API?
Please think on a name that is meaningful for the 3rd party developers out there, not just for you. "api.php" alone won't work.
We aren't calling such things the "Classic API" these days? :-)
Cheers, -- jra
something something Unicorn.
On Aug 6, 2014, at 2:32 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjorsch@wikimedia.org wrote:
When api.php was basically the only API in MediaWiki, calling it "the API" worked well. But now we've got a Parsoid API, Gabriel's work on a REST content API, Gabriel's work on an internal storage API, and more on the way. So just saying "the API" is getting confusing.
So let's bikeshed a reasonably short name for it that isn't something awful like "the api.php API". I'm horrible at naming.
-- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
--- Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
UnicornPI (unicorn-pie) sounds good to me ;)
On 8/7/14, Brandon Harris bharris@wikimedia.org wrote:
something something Unicorn.
On Aug 6, 2014, at 2:32 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjorsch@wikimedia.org wrote:
When api.php was basically the only API in MediaWiki, calling it "the API" worked well. But now we've got a Parsoid API, Gabriel's work on a REST content API, Gabriel's work on an internal storage API, and more on the way. So just saying "the API" is getting confusing.
So let's bikeshed a reasonably short name for it that isn't something awful like "the api.php API". I'm horrible at naming.
-- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Mmmm, Unicorn Pie.
Now I'm hungry.
-Chad
On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 10:37 AM, Amir Ladsgroup ladsgroup@gmail.com wrote:
UnicornPI (unicorn-pie) sounds good to me ;)
On 8/7/14, Brandon Harris bharris@wikimedia.org wrote:
something something Unicorn.On Aug 6, 2014, at 2:32 PM, Brad Jorsch (Anomie) bjorsch@wikimedia.org wrote:
When api.php was basically the only API in MediaWiki, calling it "the
API"
worked well. But now we've got a Parsoid API, Gabriel's work on a REST content API, Gabriel's work on an internal storage API, and more on the way. So just saying "the API" is getting confusing.
So let's bikeshed a reasonably short name for it that isn't something awful like "the api.php API". I'm horrible at naming.
-- Brad Jorsch (Anomie) Software Engineer Wikimedia Foundation _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Brandon Harris, Senior Designer, Wikimedia Foundation
Support Free Knowledge: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Donate
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
-- Amir
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org