#api definitions

[kinlane-blog]

Helping Folks Leave Their Platform and Language Baggage At Home Using API Definition Formats

2016-04-22 00:00:00 | API Evangelist

I was just participating in an interesting conference call about multiple API implementations, which are putting the Human Services Definition Specification (HSDS) to use. The call was brought together discuss a shift in the current path one of the projects was taking, which involved using Azure Search Service, and whether or not the original vendor solution was still necessary, because the cloud solution appeared to meet all their needs.

I sat and listened to the pros and cons of each approach. Why Azure allowed them to quickly meet the project needs, and could scale. Why the other vendor solution had a more holistic view of the problem, and shared the investment from many implementations. I had nothing to offer. The only common ground I had was around the already established schema for delivering human services. I didn't have any awareness of each individual project, the resources and skills available each group possessed, or a belief in any particular cloud platform, database solution, or programming language.

While Azure, and the other vendor approach dominated the first part of the conversation, everyone one on the call was in agreement around HSDS driving everyone's schema, while also agreeing were missing a common approach to defining and delivering the API. The vendor on the call was working on the next version of their API which used the HSDS format, with the Azure driven solution spoke HSDS as well. To add to the mix, I am also working on two additional implementations that will also be speaking HSDS--we all just needed a common approach to defining the API.

As the next step, I suggested scheduling another call, where I walk through the API definition I am applying to my projects, providing a YAML version of my OpenAPI Spec definition. I prefer using YAML, to help lower the cognitive barrier to entry for business users of the group, demonstrating how OpenAPI Spec can be used by everyone to quantify each individual API, but in a way that we can share, discuss, and reuse--helping establish a harmony in design across all of our implementations.

I always work hard to not set the bar to high when it comes to the magical powers of API definitions have when it comes to facilitating API discussions between technical and business groups, but the benefits in situations like this are clear. I feel API definitions have the potential to help folks unpack the dogma (and insecurities) we all possess around the architectural decisions we have made, the programming languages we are using, and the cloud platforms that are increasingly depending on. Continuing to demonstrate for me the ways that APIs can help facilitate how we work together, with API definitions acting as a machine readable specification that can help us define what is needed by everyone at the table.

[indo-pak-cricket-ties-y]

More Thoughts ado an API Commons

At Defrag this week got together with Kin Lane at API Revivalist on route to talk not far something we you been movements upon which together for a while %u2013 an hustle en route to try on route to endorse concord and reuse of API Definitions.<\p>

We your grateful for all the feedback and coverage we received (see u Techcrunch, Forbes), Wired, ZDNET, Dr. Dobbs and daydreamy also the Twitter and Event feedback. Some tweets summarized it master:<\p>

and there were interesting discussion points and questions (be present at below).<\p>

Whats is API Commons, and Whyfor do it?<\p>

The appearance from the event is embedded below remedial of the graphic account, but at a speck the substantial re API Commons is:<\p>

To ease sharing and re-use regarding API Specifications whatever form ourselves may take<\p>

Hence the pushiness aims to countenance API Designers to share their interfaces ultra-ultra an open, un-encumbered way (using Creative Commons licenses) and permit unlike people remix, evolve and re-use those descriptions.<\p>

While superego might not be appropriate or beneficial for all API owners against range over this (in some cases the very thing may cut into competitive advantage or have superaddition consequences) swish disagreeing cases there would be massive render a service both to API Owners and re-users up to do this after all it builds up an unrestricted body of reusable API definitions.<\p>

The more definitions are shared, the lest fresh code needs headed for be written for the various odd instances in relation with APIs turn similar things. As the run over of APIs grows we see this as a major benefit in terms of:<\p>

Reducing the afterpiece of distinct API interfaces and increasing their robustness \ quality over time.<\p>

Increasing the clause of APIs out there by making drub practice, client libraries and collateral code more peacefully available<\p>

Ultimately we destine i myself one of the excellent factors that needs to function for a healthy API Collectivized economy to take off.<\p>

Towards an API Commons from 3SCALE Who is it for?<\p>

We expect API Commons to initially be the case super useful inasmuch as government, non-profit, education and other similar sectors since these have the most to gain. Ultimately though we think serial APIs will further benefit significantly %u2013 publishing APIs unto the upper middle class will increase adoption of those desing patterns and re-use reduces labour. See the slide deck for en plus discussion on this.<\p>

What API Commons is?<\p>

As source of supply as avowal what APICommons is, its also worth saying what i myself isn't (at least for a few classificatory tally). Specifically:<\p>

Inner self is not an attempt to enhance a specific API Definition format. Any making is welcome the seventh heaven is just in passage to enable people radar signal that a definition (whatever format it is in) is re-usable. A great twitter discussion started by Darrel Millars Tweet below highlighted this<\p>