Re: [rest-discuss] RESTful URLs?
- On 01.02.2009, at 05:17, Ben Ramsey wrote:
> Please forgive this intrusion from an "outsider" to this list. I'veNo.
> followed the list for over a year now, but I've never posted, and I
> know the subject of this message may cause some commotion, but that's
> not my intent, so please don't mistake me for a troll. This is a
> genuine question.
> Is the design of the URL important to the REST architectural style?
>I think your understanding is perfectly right: Well-designed URIs are
> By the way, I do think well-designed URLs are important. That's not
> question I'm asking. I'm asking whether they are part of REST.
great, but they don't influence whether something is RESTful or not.
Using a URI like http://example.com/SomeService?methodName=launchMissiles
to identify a customer resource may be bad URI design, and indicate
a design smell, but it says nothing about the RESTfulness of the
system - it's equivalent to http://example.com/1231546543213212 from a
Stefan Tilkov, http://www.innoq.com/blog/st/
- One of this things I find I often confront is the "dis-comfort" folks
experience when they identify the "inefficiency of abstraction" that
is the result of the loose coupling in the REST style.
I usually address this comfort the same way I address the "premature
On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 07:54, Bill de hOra <bill@...> wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> On Feb 5, 2009, at 5:45 PM, Bill de hOra wrote:
>> > Also, hypertext for simple case tends to need two calls, one the
>> > bootstrap document to find the link, and two, to the actual link you
>> > care about. Whereas a fixed url scheme on the client means one call.
>> Yes, a RESTful system is at least one level of indirection away
>> from a strongly coupled system. A fixed URL scheme is essentially
>> the same as baking the first representation into each client.
> Right. I think some people, when thinking about bootstrap problems
> (which is what we're talking about here), end up in logical knots and
> fallacies, or worse, invent pointless discovery technologies to solve a
> non-problem. The first link is always out of band, get over it.
>> Is that surprising?
> Obviously not, but it seemed fair to point it out.
> Yahoo! Groups Links