Comments on: links for 2006-11-08 http://www.markbaker.ca/blog/2006/11/links-for-2006-11-08/ Celebrating the power of the Web Fri, 26 Aug 2011 20:00:51 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v= By: Mark Baker http://www.markbaker.ca/blog/2006/11/links-for-2006-11-08/comment-page-1/#comment-131 Mark Baker Thu, 09 Nov 2006 16:08:43 +0000 http://www.markbaker.ca/blog/2006/11/08/links-for-2006-11-08/#comment-131 I guess we disagree there. Roy's commented before that formal descriptions of REST are problematic. I don't recall the reasons but I would expect complexity of the descriptions - as well as of the required input in order to validate - would be a large barrier to its use even if you could build a complete model. Description languages are also unnecessary because RESTful messages are self-descriptive. IME, there's exceedingly little ambiguity in the description of REST in Roy's dissertation. On a few occasions I thought there was some, only to later learn from Roy that it's covered. IMO, it's *far* more rigorous a description than most people even need today. I guess we disagree there. Roy’s commented before that formal descriptions of REST are problematic. I don’t recall the reasons but I would expect complexity of the descriptions – as well as of the required input in order to validate – would be a large barrier to its use even if you could build a complete model. Description languages are also unnecessary because RESTful messages are self-descriptive.

IME, there’s exceedingly little ambiguity in the description of REST in Roy’s dissertation. On a few occasions I thought there was some, only to later learn from Roy that it’s covered. IMO, it’s *far* more rigorous a description than most people even need today.

]]> By: Pete Lacey http://www.markbaker.ca/blog/2006/11/links-for-2006-11-08/comment-page-1/#comment-130 Pete Lacey Wed, 08 Nov 2006 13:20:49 +0000 http://www.markbaker.ca/blog/2006/11/08/links-for-2006-11-08/#comment-130 Mark, Regarding Atom, agreed. Left off for the sake of expediency. I would add, though, that something official is needed. If REST can describe _any_ RESTful system, then it would be handy to _formally_ describe RESTful services over HTTP to remove some of the ambiguity. Whether that be incorporating Atom and APP, standardizing on a description language, or what not. That is, REST is the model, and "REST Services" are the implementation. Mark,

Regarding Atom, agreed. Left off for the sake of expediency. I would add, though, that something official is needed. If REST can describe _any_ RESTful system, then it would be handy to _formally_ describe RESTful services over HTTP to remove some of the ambiguity. Whether that be incorporating Atom and APP, standardizing on a description language, or what not. That is, REST is the model, and “REST Services” are the implementation.

]]>