On Wed, Dec 3, 2008 at 3:32 PM, Steve Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 2008/12/3 Nick Gall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> I hope you agree that if and when we ever do get around to estimating the
>> number of RESTful designers/developers we can justifiably include in that
>> count some number of website designers, not just
>> application-to-application
>> interface designers.
>
> We can, with the proviso that they aren't of course fulling doing REST
> as they can't do PUT or DELETE from the browser. I've fairly regularly
> said that for the Website interaction side that I get the REST point,
> its always been on the A2A/B2B that I've had the issue and its there
> that I tend to find myself most of my working life.

This was really all the agreement I was looking for. As I stressed in my
previous post, I wasn't really interested in getting into a debate about
REST adoption numbers. I was only interested in establishing some aspects of
what constitutes REST adoption.

Sorry I didn't realize that you were already on record as considering
website designers/developers as RESTful designers/developers so long as
their site designs reach some agreed upon threshold of compliance with the
REST constraints. I mistook your comment about websites having NOTHING to do
with estimating REST adoption, as an assertion that website
designers/develops have NOTHING to do with REST adoption under any
circumstances, ie websites designers/developers are categorically excluded
from discussions of REST adoption.

So to be sure I am understanding you correctly, would you agree with the
following statement?

REST can be adopted in A2A and B2B design/development, as well as website
design/development.

-- Nick

Reply via email to