Restructure REST endpoints

Description

Even though the current available REST endpoints are working as expected, we should revisit the naming pattern there to follow some common best practices (e.g. a good description can be found at http://www.vinaysahni.com/best-practices-for-a-pragmatic-restful-api , but there are more resources which basically suggest the same).

Currently, we do have something like this:

According to the documentation, better would be:

Having 5 or the invocation ID with 461... in the URL itself, you have to pass it to get some details and thus it's clearly not optional and easily readable.

, : I would like to hear your opinion on this as you have designed the current REST API. Do you see any problems with this approach?

Environment

None

Assignee

Mario Mann

Reporter

Patrice Bouillet

Labels

None

Integrator

Patrice Bouillet

Sprint

None

Fix versions

Affects versions

Priority

Low
Configure