- From: Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Apr 2013 10:03:25 +0200
- To: "Eric J. Bowman" <eric@bisonsystems.net>
- Cc: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, TAG List <www-tag@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAKaEYh+istXVXu81+H-SqWggsxcYpAX8gsWbfqnJsbJZhqNOAA@mail.gmail.com>
On 26 March 2013 05:18, Eric J. Bowman <eric@bisonsystems.net> wrote: > Harry Halpin wrote: > > > > Yet I'm of the "media types might be an anti-pattern" opinion the > > more I think about this given they can't be controlled often by > > document authors. > > > > An architecture not based on media types would change the nature of > intermediaries, obsoleting much of the deployed infrastructure of the > Web. The result is some other pattern entirely, i.e. an architectural > style which is no longer REST, which has yet to be defined. > > While problems do exist, the concept of media types is so central to > the Web architecture, that basically calling them a flaw in that > architecture drastically understates the ramifications -- deprecating > media types results in a completely undocumented and untested new > architectural style. > > Scientifically, I have to be skeptical of this notion for a system as > massively peer-reviewed and deployed as the Web, when the proposed > mechanism for such sweeping change is a TAG edict not backed up by any > published academic work. > > I believe that the concepts in REST are more important than the style > itself -- Roy devised a methodology for improving the Web architecture. > If, after this much passage of time, we come to falsify his conclusions, > hasn't the fantastic success of the modern Web vs. the original Web over > that time proven the methodology sound? > > Falsification of REST's reliance on media types has not emerged as yet, > but if there's a case to be made (as some of you seem to believe), then > by all means make it, using Roy's proven methodology so we can all > follow your logic, and those qualified may participate in the peer- > review process involved in the publication of a scientific paper. > > This paper may be made quite concise by stipulating to Dr. Fielding's > definitions and classifications (as they're the accepted science in the > field, now). The goal, starting with the null style, is to add > recognized constraints derived from existing styles, to create a new > hybrid style which addresses the limitations of the existing Web and > devises solutions to them. > > Such a paper must then honestly compare and contrast the new style with > REST, in terms of scalability and security, based on prototype > implementations. The TAG is tasked with the stewardship of the Web > architecture. If the TAG determines that the architecture is outmoded > and needs changing, such a decision demands nothing less than getting > such an academic work out there for peer review *before* taking action. > > Until then, I remain unconvinced that sniffing for magic numbers is any > more than a *different* solution, not a *better* solution, if I have to > leave the pros and cons to the unsubstantiated opinions of myself and > others. > +1 > > -Eric > >
Received on Monday, 1 April 2013 08:03:53 UTC