Re:REST Anti-Patterns (2008)
by RandomOpinion on Wednesday May 10, 2017 @12:57PM
(#14309689)
Much as I would like to agree with you, that war was already fought and lost in the early '00s. Port 80/443 were the two ports that couldn't ever be firewalled because web browsing depended on them, so everybody rushed to cram their RPC requests into some kind of HTTP-based protocol.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
HTTP != REST though, as the article notes. There are other ways to use port 80/443 that neither violate HTTP nor go full REST - websocket being an (extreme) example.
Even the HTTP monopoly is changing. There are lots of new protocols (HTTP2, QUIC, WebRTC) that work besides firewalls and things like ALPN gives a standardized way to tunnel new protocols over an encrypted connection.
>HTTP != REST though, as the article notes.
The article might note it, and Roy might insist on it, but nobody cares.
For all intents and purposes, what people call REST in practical use is RPC over HTTP with JSON responses.
But then these people are just very wrong. No point encouraging them either :)
The entire industry is just people who are very wrong hitting critical mass until no one remembers what was right.
Re:REST Anti-Patterns (2008)
by dragonwriter on Wednesday May 10, 2017 @04:28PM
(#14311361)
> HTTP != REST though, as the article notes.
Well, HTTP itself is the archetypical REST API, though.