mnot on REST

Mark has a nice post on REST issues.

Mark gives me too much credit for the lo-rest/hi-rest terminology - I saw it in a Nelson Minnar/Google deck and assumed that it was implicitly “not evil.” Little did I know...

More to the point, I completely agree with his assessment of the “real” issues at play.

In particular, the authentication/identity story is very tough (MD5-ing by hand is for the birds (thanks for nothing Flickr)).

Worse is the contentType/format issues - in SOAP we took XML as the “top” of our data model and inherited XSD (and sufferred mightily for it).

In HTTP/REST, MIME is the “top” of the data model and you wind up inducing XML (and JSON and RDF and...) if you need to build general purpose software. Ouch! Hence the lack of great and diverse tooling support - it's hard!

As for the “lo-rest/hi-rest” dichotomy that Mark has saddled me with, I do think the REST-afarians are missing an opportunity by not driving home the secret sauce that is HTTP GET.

It's a no-brainer and I sometimes think the REST folks are “breaking into jail” by dragging in the rest of Roy's dissertation.

GET is one of the most optimized pieces of distributed systems plumbing in the world. 

It's an absolute/objective slam dunk.

No arguing/evangelism needed IMO.

GET is the classic “the first bag is free” kind of feature a platform builder dreams about.


Posted Mar 07 2007, 03:20 AM by don-box

Comments

Alan Dean wrote re: mnot on REST
on 03-07-2007 5:11 AM
I agree that the "GET Story" is incredibly important to REST.

The Content-Type (negotiation) issue is what I am tackling right now in my own framework. I spawned a thread on [rest-discuss] to try to stimulate debate on how client and servers might mutually agree the representation formatting without having to exchange a document.

See http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/rest-discuss/message/8074
Mark Nottingham wrote re: mnot on REST
on 03-07-2007 10:29 AM
OK, Don, I owe you a drink; I know a few great bars in Melbourne. :)

I agree WRT GET; the lowest-hanging fruit and biggest, most obvious selling point of HTTP for services right now is caching, and that's thanks to GET.

Cheers,
Christopher Steen wrote Link Listing - March 7, 2007
on 03-07-2007 9:41 PM
Updating the MultiDayForecast Web Control [Via: ] Ajax Portlets: JSR-168 portlets, SOA, and more [Via:...
Don Box's Spoutlet wrote More on GET
on 03-08-2007 1:58 PM
My loss in this game wrote re: mnot on REST
on 03-08-2007 3:31 PM
I think it all sucks whenever I see Ajax in comments.

I don't buy that composition is overrated.

I think caching is focusing on the wrong problem that Internet as the daddy of Web has to deal with.

I think SOA is only good for its 'boundary'.

I am scared that my browser hangs in app or just on its own, esp while it could some WPF great 3D gimmicks but more importantly with right infrastructure behind it.

I fear SOA even more if it broke down on bloated XML encoding over the Web.

I believe the only content type plumbing ever required was always in place. Google took it on and is making a huge business out of it.

The Web could be so much better with better GET and better 'runtime.' My 10 quid for pizza goes to something similar to Cisco as the next Google phenomenon.

Won't wait for any of it though.. why bother.
And in the meantime, I'll stick to a single-machine scenario whenever I can afford to; one life to live right?

on 03-19-2007 6:57 AM
I’ve collected lots of somewhat REST-connected posts in the last two weeks, but somehow can’t seem to find the time to comment … so here’s a quick linkdump: Verbs and Interaction patterns, Benjamin Carlyle, including some interesting thoughts on a gateway approach between WS-* and REST Mark Nottingham on REST issues, real and imagined — good points, especially regarding URI...
niliy wrote re: mnot on REST
on 05-30-2007 5:18 PM
I agree WRT GET;

Add a Comment

(required)  
(optional)
(required)  
Remember Me?