19195Re: [rest-discuss] URI design, part 2
- Nov 30, 2012What I'd love to get is an answer like: POST /orders/1/cancel is not
REST compliant because chapter x of Fielding's dissertation explicitly
or implicitly says it's not allowed or it's discouraged. After knowing
what is or isn't REST then I'd love to learn more about the pros and
cons of different architectural and implementation styles.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 6:12 PM, Eric J. Bowman <eric@...> wrote:
> Nicholas Shanks wrote:
>> For reference, stackoverflow.com is a good place to go with these
>> sorts of questions. Many have already been asked in various forms,
>> you'll find the answers already provided.
> Pretty good answer, except for that... Welcome to rest-discuss! ;-)
> Here, the archives are full of list regulars being told directly by the
> likes of Roy and Mark dozens of times that we're wrong. Gradually,
> this group has become _the_ place to get schooled on REST as intended
> by Fielding. There, I don't see many answers from those who've put
> their knowledge to the test, here. What I do see are attempts to define
> REST in terms of implementation rather than style, i.e. Wikipedia REST,
> not Fielding REST.
> So pick the place that best suits your needs -- there if you want
> implementation, here if you want architecture; there is a difference,
> which comes down to the proportion of answers from those who've been
> "vetted" by Roy (and Mark, and others) over the years, and understand
> REST as an architectural style as opposed to implementation guidelines.
> Just my two cents.
- << Previous post in topic Next post in topic >>