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

Re: [rest-discuss] How much REST should your Web API get?

Expand Messages
  • Mike Schinkel
    Once again you have given me much to ponder. Thanks for the effort; I will be trying to internalize this. -Mike
    Message 1 of 46 , May 4, 2013
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Once again you have given me much to ponder. Thanks for the effort; I will be trying to internalize this.

      -Mike

      On May 4, 2013, at 1:49 PM, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@...> wrote:

      > On Saturday, May 04, 2013 7:03 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote:
      >> Hmm. Okay, the more I think I understand about REST the more I think
      >> I don't understand and/or am unsure who actually really understands
      >> REST besides Roy.
      >>
      >> As I've read Roy I've come away understanding that messages must be
      >> self-contained
      >
      > No, you are confusing self-contained with self-descriptive.
      >
      >
      >> and the only thing the client should know is how the
      >> links in the returned representation are defined to behave as defined
      >> by the representation's content yype. Having links in one document and
      >> data in a second document where you have to have the contents of both
      >> documents seems to me to violate that need for self-containment.
      >
      > ... if there would be a self-containment constraint that would be true --
      > but there isn't.
      >
      >
      >> I do have one question; if there is a home document that is cacheable
      >> for some period "X" and at the time immediately after an API client
      >> retrieves the home document the servers are moved and the client later
      >> perform an operation that requires URLs from the home document but
      >> before "X" time has passed, it can cause failure. If the message is
      >> self-contained that time window is greatly reduced. This is one of the
      >> reasons I can postulate there is a need for self-contained messages.
      >
      > That doesn't matter at all. Program defensively, detect the error, and
      > recover.
      >
      > I could just as well argue that separating them allows you to request them
      > in parallel which would probably be faster so the time window you are
      > talking about would be reduced even further.
      >
      >
      >
      > --
      > Markus Lanthaler
      > @markuslanthaler
      >
    • Mike Schinkel
      Once again you have given me much to ponder. Thanks for the effort; I will be trying to internalize this. -Mike
      Message 46 of 46 , May 4, 2013
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Once again you have given me much to ponder. Thanks for the effort; I will be trying to internalize this.

        -Mike

        On May 4, 2013, at 1:49 PM, "Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@...> wrote:

        > On Saturday, May 04, 2013 7:03 PM, Mike Schinkel wrote:
        >> Hmm. Okay, the more I think I understand about REST the more I think
        >> I don't understand and/or am unsure who actually really understands
        >> REST besides Roy.
        >>
        >> As I've read Roy I've come away understanding that messages must be
        >> self-contained
        >
        > No, you are confusing self-contained with self-descriptive.
        >
        >
        >> and the only thing the client should know is how the
        >> links in the returned representation are defined to behave as defined
        >> by the representation's content yype. Having links in one document and
        >> data in a second document where you have to have the contents of both
        >> documents seems to me to violate that need for self-containment.
        >
        > ... if there would be a self-containment constraint that would be true --
        > but there isn't.
        >
        >
        >> I do have one question; if there is a home document that is cacheable
        >> for some period "X" and at the time immediately after an API client
        >> retrieves the home document the servers are moved and the client later
        >> perform an operation that requires URLs from the home document but
        >> before "X" time has passed, it can cause failure. If the message is
        >> self-contained that time window is greatly reduced. This is one of the
        >> reasons I can postulate there is a need for self-contained messages.
        >
        > That doesn't matter at all. Program defensively, detect the error, and
        > recover.
        >
        > I could just as well argue that separating them allows you to request them
        > in parallel which would probably be faster so the time window you are
        > talking about would be reduced even further.
        >
        >
        >
        > --
        > Markus Lanthaler
        > @markuslanthaler
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.