Updated April 13, 2023
Difference Between RAML vs Swagger
This article basically involves differences between RAML and Swagger. RAML ( RESTful API Modeling Language ) belongs to API tools, whereas Swagger is a dependency-free collection of UI that belongs to Documentation as Service and Tools. RAML vs Swagger, these are the two most popular specifications for developing API’s.
Head to Head Comparison Between RAML vs Swagger (Infographics)
Below are the top 25 differences between RAML and Swagger:
Key Difference Between RAML vs Swagger
Let us discuss some of the major key differences between RAML and Swagger:
- RAML, also known as RESTful API Modeling Language and Swagger, is also known as Open API/ OAS.
- RAML belongs to the tech stack of API Tools, whereas Swagger can be classified as ‘Documentation as Services and Tools’.
- RAML provides an easy way of writing API’ and is reusable, human-friendly, whereas Swagger is an API Compliant and ‘Open Source.
- RAML is YAML based language with a hierarchical style format, whereas Swagger is referred to as language-agnostic. YAML used Python-style indentation.
- Additionally, RAML supports Elixer and Pearl, whereas Swagger supports Coldfusion, D, Eiffel, Groovy, Erlang, Typescript and Clojure.
- Since REST does not have a standard to describe or publish RESTful API’s, WSDL describes these standards. One of these standards is RAML.
- RAML and Open API/ Swagger are two descriptive languages that have gained importance in RESTful services.
- RAML describes API’s endpoints, whereas Swagger supports JSON format.
RAML vs Swagger Comparison Table
Let’s discuss the top comparison between RAML vs Swagger:
|Creating RAML aims to provide necessary information to RESTful API’s to provide a simple way of designing API.
|The goal of creating Swagger is to keep documentation, client libraries and source code all in sync.
|RAML was created in 2013.
|Swagger was created in 2010, previously known as OpenAPI, a specification.
|Current version of RAML is RAML1.0(2017-07-06)
|The current version of Swagger is 3.0.1(2017-12-17)
|RAML is supported by Mulesoft, Intuit, AngulasJs, PayPal, Programmable Web and API service, Cisco, VMWare, etc
|Swagger is supported by Google, IBM, Atlassian and Microsoft.
|RAML specification defines the application of YAML 1.2, which provisions source code generators for client and server source code.
|Swagger documents can be written in YAML; the specification also supports JSON format, both being interchangeable.
|Tools and Editors for RAML, API Workbench IDE based on Atom.
|Tools and Editors for Swagger are CodeGen, UI and Editor.
|Developers choose RAML because of API specification, design patterns and code reusability, and it is human readable.
|Swagger is chosen as it is open-source, free to use, customizable and can execute API calls from the documentation.
|Companies such as Taboola, ikusei, Folk Labs, Coding Sans use RAML.
|Companies such as Zalando, Hepziburada, HootSuite, Glovo, Rainist use Swagger.
|Tools such as Sandbox, MireDot, Firecamp integrate with RAML.
|Tools like Node.js, GIT, Firefox, Google Chrome integrate with Swagger.
|Mulesoft is the primary sponsor of RAML.
|SmartBear is the primary sponsor of Swagger.
|RAML is backed up by a large open-source community that provides hundreds of customizable and prebuilt tools.
|Swagger specifications are donated to OpenAPI Initiative (OAI) and have been renamed as OpenAPI Specification.
|RAML supports Stub generators.
|Likewise, Swagger too supports Stub generators.
|RAML supports strong visual-based IDE and online tooling.
|Swagger has a high adoption rate, i.e. a lot of documentation.
|RAML allows for design patterns and maintains a single specification.
|Swagger has a strong framework support.
|RAML does not support strong documentation.
|Swagger requires multiple specifications for tools, including Dev and QA.
|RAML allows limited reusability and extensions.
|Swagger does not allow code reusability, inclusions or extensions.
|New versions of RAML has poor support for tools.
|Swagger lacks in good developer tools.
|RAML lets the user see how API looks like on designing easy to read plain text.
|Swagger is a developer-only documentation tool, i.e. the only user who codes API can document the project.
|RAML is more error-prone; hence it uses API Blueprint, which is concise.
|Swagger is not much error-prone since it uses automatic documentation generation.
|RAML supports the entire API lifecycle, providing support to developer tools and technical writers.
|Swagger specifies behaviour that effects API to create more complex and interlocking systems.
|Compared to Swagger, navigation in RAML is easy.
|Navigation in Swagger is a bit difficult.
|In RAML, the markup language YAML is chosen to make API’s human-readable.
|Reading an API by Swagger is the biggest limitation.
|The main reason for developing RAML as such, it is much appealing to developers.
|Swagger is based on JSON and is limited to its format limitation and data serialization.
|RAML specifications are written carefully, and references are clear and easy to read.
|Swagger implements its own Python-based web service declaring API.
|RAML supports JSON schema and W3C XML.
|Swagger does not support XML, and version 1.2 uses only a subset of JSON.
On clear observation, RAML is the better option as Swagger is built on general schema support; even higher versions do not show much-required improvement. RAML has been improved over the past and keep its current priorities by providing generic support for schemas. Both languages produce good API’s despite their differences; strong documentation and compatibility are Swagger’s plus a bottom-up approach, whereas RAML is a top-down approach. Based on the User’s requirement, one can consider using Swagger or RAML.
This is a guide to RAML vs Swagger. Here we discuss the difference between RAML vs Swagger along with key differences, infographics and a comparison table. You may also have a look at the following articles to learn more –