Re: REST and HTTP, was: [ietf-http-wg] <none>

Since REST is a particular style constraint on Web Service protocol
design, the requirements of REST should logically be a subset of the
requirements for unconstrained Web Service protocol design.


On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 5:41 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> On 2012-07-25 01:26, Eric J. Bowman wrote:
>>
>> Samuel Erdtman wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Have the requirements for REST APIs been considered?
>>>
>>
>> Doesn't look like they have.  My impression, after catching up on 100's
>> of posts, is that plenty of folks are ready to throw out the baby (REST)
>> with the bathwater (HTTP 1).
>>
>> Leading me to give +1 to PHK's point, echoed by others, that starting
>> with proposals before establishing goals seems to be skipping some
>> steps, i.e. moving too fast.
>>
>> Intermediaries aren't optional to the REST style, they're integral to
>> the success of the Web.  HTTP 2 should not, IMO, result in a new and
>> incompatible architectural style which only scales well for those big
>> companies with a global DC presence and CDNs.
>> ...
>
>
> Do you have REST-related concerns beyond the ones related to intermediaries
> (which I share)?
>
> Best regards, Julian
>



-- 
Website: http://hallambaker.com/

Received on Wednesday, 25 July 2012 12:23:50 UTC