Why is there a preference, within the REST community, for URIs of the form
rather than this form?
Is there a specification that mandates the former or is it simply consensus
within the group that the former is "more RESTful" than the latter?
- On Wednesday, February 11, 2004, at 07:55 PM, Mark Baker wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 11, 2004 at 05:56:27PM -0800, Roy T. Fielding wrote:That may be true as well, but I was referring to human factors:
>> The rationale for REST being different from RDA, aside from greater
>> flexibility of implementation, is that remote data access interfaces
>> are extremely susceptible to abuse by rogue clients.
> My hunch is that those are the same; that less implementation
> flexibility yields more predictable forms of attack. Or perhaps you
> had some more general concern in mind?
WWW server developers are far more paranoid than DBAs because they
get abused when they aren't paranoid enough. Databases, in contrast,
are sold by feature list, just like a word processor. The WWW server
(or firewall) is supposed to protect the DB from the real world.