Issue 211

[yuranos]

Based on #211
@stojsavljevic , please review.

[stojsavljevic]

@yuranos in #211 I stated that this is a feature not a bug :)
So what's the point of this PR?

[yuranos]

HI, @stojsavljevic !
I created a PR before I saw your comment:)
Having said that, I think it's an unnecessary limitation. It's more common to use plural notation, but there's more than one way to skin a cat, i.e., a lot of people will argue otherwise.
My suggestion is not breaking anything that was already there, it's just making the decision based on something that is less debatable than naming convention(id in the path).
Do you see any potential problems with my idea?
Please, check for more evidence that the view is not one-sided:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6845772/rest-uri-convention-singular-or-plural-name-of-resource-while-creating-it
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/778203/are-there-any-naming-convention-guidelines-for-rest-apis
People have different views on pluralism vs singularity.

[yuranos]

@stojsavljevic , time to get back to this one.