> I wrote: > > So, there is indeed a dichotomy between REST (as applied to > > HTTP) and RPC.
Jerome wrote: > He talks about "significant difference" between HTTP and traditional-RPC > (like RMI or CORBA) and not about "dichotomy" which means total separation > with no overlap (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dichotomy). If not, how would > you explain the existence of XML-RPC with use HTTP in a limited but correct > way? Now, it seems like you are forcing reality into your own simplistic > model of REST and HTTP ;-) [..] > It seems to me that you were influenced by the common opposition between > REST/HTTP and SOAP. John wrote: > No, there's not. He's just defined a particular, constrained, > definition of what "RPC" means to use as a label for what he's talking > about so that he can make the comparison. That's a big part of my > point: "RPC" is almost completely meaningless as a term of art anymore > because it's been so overused with so many different meanings. I'm realizing that opposing REST to RPC was that the wrong approach. I've been quiet lately because I wanted to spend some time re-reading (again!) Roy's dissertation, as well as catching up with the rest-discuss group. Thanks for not giving on me. I shall play with restlet now, and see if I manage to wrap my mind on this REST thing all the cool kids are talking about ;) -Vincent.
