Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: > Yes, it is. But the whole REST concept is a best practice on top of > something old. After all, it's just a way of using classic HTTP in a > special way. There are no hard validation rules yet, and the fact that > something is or isn't REST depends on the person you ask.
The ultimate validation is Roy Fielding's thesis. Anyway, I am not against what we have said. What I would like to avoid is to build a so called RESTful Api that is not RESTful and that would be criticized as this API http://wikis.glassfish.org/socialsite/Wiki.jsp?page=FinalizeRESTAPI in this post http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be-hypertext-driven > About the long URLs, many coding books suggest that longer, descriptive > names are better than very short ones. A name should be long enough to > describe what it holds, but from all the possibilities, the shorter ones > are preferable. Short, _understandable_ names. A URL is a name, too. We > should favor understandability over shortness. > I am +1 about this, don't misunderstand me. Now the problem is to use these URI in a proper RESTful context. Well conceived media types and hypermedia leverage is the biggest challenge now. -Fabio _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
