Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

19465Re: [rest-discuss] conneg considered harmful

Expand Messages
  • Mike Kelly
    Jun 8, 2013

      On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Eric J. Bowman <eric@...> wrote:

      > BTW - i'd be happy to see user-agents support client-driven
      > negotiation. i used to think this meant common browsers MUST be the
      > leaders for a feature like this. but recently i've started to think
       > that native-built mobile clients could start to turn the tide on what
      > features show up in the pipeline.

      +1, and +1 to [1] and [2] while I'm at it...

      Browsers are truly becoming their own, undefined architecture. REST
      may become unfeasible as a model for browser-based system performance,
      which hardly means it won't continue to be the ideal, or that resources
      will cease to exist as an abstract concept even if TAG replaces the term
      in AWWW v2.

      What do you mean by 'undefined'? Running code has definitive behaviour: http://caniuse.com/

      What is it, specifically, that you feel may be about to render browsers infeasible as the basis for a RESTful system?

      Is there anything missing that would make it feasible and if so why is it missing? e.g. why did the efforts to introduce PUT and DELETE to <form> fail?

      fwiw, I am -1 to this idea of trying to "defend REST" by pursuing a competing platform on 'native mobile'. It seems like a huge waste of time.. How can you do this without essentially just reproducing something that does what a browser does already? Surely, it would be better to direct all that energy towards improving the trajectory of this new, "living" browser platform? Even if that is a hard slog, it's probably the most likely way of getting the outcome you want.

    • Show all 20 messages in this topic