On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 4:22 AM, Antony Blakey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't think Couch is truly REST. Certainly _bulk_docs isn't. The fact that > there are URI patterns means it's not REST, at least not if I've understood > Roy's recent communications/frustrations, such as > http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be-hypertext-driven. > > In particular, point 4 seems to disqualify any system, (including Couch) > that needs the documents in the "Reference" section of the Wiki. > > To be REST it has to be just like the web. Using links discovered from > documents, never constructing them according to some scheme. >
Ah, shaving the yak shed. But I've been thinking about this as well. If we were to attack this problem of "High REST" head-on, I think the appropriate course would be to define a media type application/couch+json or something. The media type's definition would explain how to get from "id" params to document URIs, etc. Doing that is all it would take to be (mostly) RESTful. I think the existence of _bulk_docs POST doesn't break RESTfulness, either. There's no law that says a system can't define RESTful resources alongside RPC endpoints. I'm not sure how meditating on the Zen of REST will help us get json-diffs right, but it sure can't hurt. Chris -- Chris Anderson http://jchris.mfdz.com
