In a really awesome essay (sorry for the delay, I was on vacation), Savas ponders, among other things, what it would mean to be a RESTafarian. It seems the one thing holding him back from being a card carrying member of the club though, is that the whole idea of binding application semantics to a protocol seems sorta silly to him. Well, I don’t believe it is, but fortunately, what you believe about that subject matters not to your eligibility for membership. This is because REST, as an architectural style, says nothing about how any particular architecture is implemented. “All” it does is constrain your architectural elements.
So, if your architecture has uniform connector semantics (even if there’s only a single one called “processThis”), and if your architecture has a single data element which identifies resources which act as message endpoints, and it uses fully self-descriptive messages, et cetera …, then your architecture is RESTful, like it or not.
Savas, your card’s in the mail. 8-)
P.S. it hurts to type so don’t expect speedy email or blog replies – a side effect of skewering your hand with a broken wine glass stem.