REST
by earl, 8020 days ago
Representational State Transfer
REST Discussion Mailing List The REST wikia browse dump in progress
the ultimate REST paper, Roy Fieldings PhD dissertation
- Roy Fielding, Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures
rest at work
- Les Orchard, REST: What's it good for? Part Deux
- Paul Prescod, REST and the Real World
various REST articles, well worth a read
- Leigh Dodds, When to Use Get?
- Paul Prescod, Google's Gaffe
- Paul Prescod, Questioning the Google API
- Bob Atkinson, On RPC over HTTP-POST
- Edd Dumbill, Kicking out the Cuckoo
- Ken McLeod, Web RPCs Considered Harmful
- Paul Prescod, Second Generation Web Services
leigh dodds' article provides a real good overview of the SOAP/... vs REST debate still going on. and it is an interesting debate indeed.
various rest quotes
--
Anything that can be done with other architectural styles, such as message passing, RPC, tuple spaces, etc.. can also be accomplished with REST. It just has to be done in a different way. - [create Mark Baker]
--
The problem with REST is that it's a weird name, feels like a religion, has a Wiki site as its home and noone's heard of HTTP PUT and DELETE. - Patrick Breitenbach
--
The fact of the matter is that most CGI scripts are not HTTP compliant. [...] The point is to describe to developers the ways in which an interface can be better implemented on the Web. REST is not the easiest way to provide an interface on the Web. In fact, doing it right requires fairly sophisticated software. CGI makes life easy for programmers. REST-like operation makes life easy for users and content maintainers. - Roy Fielding
--
SOAP as commonly practiced offers nothing in the way of compatibility with HTML, XSLT, RDF, XLink, or SVG. In addition, it is responsible for the promotion of non-standard URNs (e.g. urn:GoogleSearch), collapses all the resources of an endpoint behind one URI, and uses HTTP in a way that most experts think is highly inappropriate. The "web" in "web services" is contemptible. - Edd Dumbill
--
In order for SOAP-ng to succeed as a Web protocol, it needs to start behaving like it is part of the Web. That means, among other things, that it should stop trying to encapsulate all sorts of actions under an object-specific interface. It needs to limit its object-specific behavior to those situations in which object-specific behavior is actually desirable. If it does not do so, then it is not using URI as the basis for resource identification, and therefore it is no more part of the Web than SMTP. - Roy Fielding
(maybe that understanding of why SMTP is no part of the web is critical to the understanding of some illnesses of email)
--
I'm talking about XInclude, XLink, XPath, RSS, XHTML, XSLT, RDF, weblogs and Topic Maps. These are *powerful* information combination and relation tools. But they cannot be used with information hidden behind SOAP endpoints. I would say that any service that denies its users the use of these tools is somewhat broken. - [create Paul Prescod]
search
3 active users
- unknown (3)
backlinks (more)
recent stores (more)
echo earlZstrainYat|tr ZY @.
