blocks|key|968702|text|Web+API可能是WCF中REST开发的未来。这只是一个预览，在最终发布之前(可能是在.NET框架的下一个版本中)可能会有显着的变化。因此，如果您想要构建生产REST服务，您应该使用webHttpBinding。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|968703|关于Web的可用信息可以在例如.NET+Connected+Framework+team's+blog和您提到的网站上找到。它是对当前REST+API的简化和扩展。|offset|length|968704|entityMap|0|LINK|mutability|MUTABLE|url|http://blogs.msdn.com/b/endpoint/archive/tags/wcf%2Bweb%2Bapis/^0|0|F|10|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|O|8|@]|9|@$D|P|E|Q|1|R]]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|-4|5|6|7|S|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|G|$H|$5|I|J|K|A|$L|M]]]]

The Web API is something like possible future of REST development in WCF. It is just preview which can significantly change before final release (probably in next version of .NET framework). So if you want to build production REST service you should use webHttpBinding.

Available information about Web Api can be found for example on <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/b/endpoint/archive/tags/wcf+web+apis/" rel="nofollow">.NET Connected Framework team's blog</a> and on the site you mentioned. It is simplification and extension of current REST API.

blocks|key|753210|text|对我来说，最重要的区别是编程模型的变化。您不再编写“服务”来公开绑定到HTTP习惯用法(GET、POST等)的“操作”。使用Web，您可以创建客户端可以与之交互的“资源”(POCOs)。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|753211|Web似乎更擅长处理各种自定义媒体类型(例如PNG图像)。|753212|最后但并非最不重要的一点是，Web更适合自动化测试。例如，您不再需要使用静态上下文类来访问HTTP概念，例如响应码。您可以使用POCO请求和响应类，这些类可以使用旧式的new()操作符在自动化测试中轻松实例化。|753213|我同意Ladislav的观点，Web现在只是一个预览，在它之上构建应用程序可能是有风险的，而且通过许可协议的方式是被禁止的(但我没有检查过这一点)。|753214|你有没有考虑过@serialseb的OpenRasta？它是稳定的，并且为构建RESTful服务提供了非常好的编程模型。|753215|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|O|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|-4|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|K|$]]

The most significant difference for me is the change in programming model. You no longer write 'services' which expose 'operations' bound to HTTP idioms (GET, POST etc.). With Web APIs you create 'resources' (POCOs) with which your clients can interact.

Web APIs seem to be better at handling various custom media types (like PNG images for example).

Last but not least, Web APIs are far better suited for automated testing. For instance, you no longer have to use static context classes to access HTTP concepts such as response codes. You use POCO request and response classes which can be easily instantiated in automated tests using old-style new() operator.

I agree with Ladislav that Web APIs are just a preview now and building application on top of it can be both risky and forbidden by the means of license agreement (but I haven't checked that). 

Have you considered @serialseb's OpenRasta? It is stable and offers very nice programming model for building RESTful services.

blocks|key|753303|text|Web+API提供了一个基于HTTP的REST友好API。Web使用了MVC的模式，这对于ASP.NET+MVC开发人员来说是非常熟悉的。Web+API可以利用HTTP作为应用层协议的功能，以多种表示形式(XML、JSON、HTML等)返回资源。根据客户端的请求头。|type|unstyled|depth|inlineStyleRanges|entityRanges|data|753304|另一方面，WCF+webHttpBinding使用了WCF的模式，并将更多地吸引WCF开发人员-+ServiceContracts，OperationContracts，全面(或超重，取决于您如何看待它，配置文件)，在IIS之外自我托管的能力。|753305|我喜欢Web+API的一个原因是能够使用动态类型来摆脱类型系统的限制。我也喜欢Web中的默认异常行为-对比WCF，其中，默认情况下，异常冒泡为HTTP500%2B+webHttpBinding有效负载(yuk!)。|753306|在这里有两种优秀的技术可供选择是件很好的事情。我不会说Web比WCF“更新”或“更好”，因为这意味着它是一种替代技术，WCF+webHttpBinding是遗留的，我不相信这是真的。|753307|我最近选择使用WCF来公开现有webHttpBinding服务的JSON+API。我认为这是一个很好的选择，因为它符合现有解决方案的风格，并将所需的更改量降至最低。|753308|entityMap^0|0|0|0|0|0^^$0|@$1|2|3|4|5|6|7|L|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|B|3|C|5|6|7|M|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|D|3|E|5|6|7|N|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|F|3|G|5|6|7|O|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|H|3|I|5|6|7|P|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]|$1|J|3|-4|5|6|7|Q|8|@]|9|@]|A|$]]]|K|$]]

Web API provides a REST-friendly HTTP based API. Web API uses the patterns of MVC and is going to be very familiar to ASP.NET MVC developers. Web API can leverage the capabilities of HTTP as an application layer protocol, returning resources in multiple representations (XML, JSON, HTML etc.) according the the client's request headers.

On the other hand WCF webHttpBinding uses the patterns of WCF, and is going to appeal more to the WCF developer - ServiceContracts, OperationContracts, comprehensive (or overweight, depending how you look at it, config file), ability to self-host outside of IIS.

One of the things I like about Web API is the ability to use dynamic types to escape the constraints of the type system. I also like the default exception behavior in Web API - contrast WCF webHttpBinding where, by default, exceptions bubble up as HTTP 500 + an HTML payload (yuk!).

Its nice to have the choice between two excellent technologies here. I wouldn't describe Web API as 'newer' or 'better' that WCF, as this implies its a replacement technology and that WCF webHttpBinding is legacy, which I don't believe is true.

I chose to use WCF webHttpBinding recently to expose a JSON API for an existing WCF SOAP service. I believe it was a good choice because it fitted that style of that existing solution and minimized the amount of change required.

I'm new to WCF RESTFull services developpment and I'm looking for some usefull information and your experience feedback about using webHttpBinding compared to the new WCF Web API <a href="http://wcf.codeplex.com/">http://wcf.codeplex.com/</a>.

What I'm looking for is to know about the shortcomings of webHttpBinding and therefore why to use the new Web api and especially what problems the new API resolves.
If you could point me to some blog posts comparing both of them or just talking about the problems when using webHttpBinding I would appreciate. Thank you in advance.

WCF Web Api vs WebHttpBinding

JSON

我是Web服务开发的新手，我正在寻找一些有用的信息和您对使用webHttpBinding与新的WCF Web API 进行比较的经验反馈。我想知道的是webHttpBinding的缺点，以及为什么要使用新的Web api，特别是新的API解决了什么问题。如果你能给我一些比较两者的博客文章，或者只是谈谈使用webHttp...

问WCF Web Api vs WebHttpBinding
EN

社区

活动

资源

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问WCF Web Api vs WebHttpBindingEN

社区

活动

资源

关于

腾讯云开发者

热门产品

热门推荐

更多推荐

问WCF Web Api vs WebHttpBinding
EN