
A Response to REST Is the New SOAP - ingve
https://philsturgeon.uk/api/2017/12/18/rest-confusion-explained/
======
The_Amp_Walrus
So I need to read this-that-and-the-other to _really_ understand REST, and
many other people misunderstand and misimplement pseudo-RESTful services. This
implies that the 'standard' is too complicated and nuanced to be useful.
What's the point of a lingua franca for web services if most people are too
stupid to understand it?

~~~
bmn__
The designers of the Web (the formalisation of its architectural style is
called REST, there is no 'standard') first and foremost cared that it works
well. If it's more difficult to understand than RPC, so be it. Make an effort,
that never hurt. If more people would make an effort, we would have less
articles with infuriating clickbait headlines arguing against strawmen, like
the original one by Chambon.

------
RandyRanderson
The beauty of REST is that it's not defined. If one says it's no great, the
response is "that's not REST". A nice trick.

One would think that a integration protocol standard would be defined by
someone who's been doing integration for years, over many projects. And only
then would those hard-won lessons would be codified in a standard.

Nope, it was by a student for a thesis. Are students known for their
expereince in integration? Also this guy was "heavily involved in the
development of HTML and Uniform Resource Identifiers" [0]. Other questionable
'standards', IMO.

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Fielding](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roy_Fielding)

------
based2
[https://lobste.rs/s/yow5nr/response_rest_is_new_soap](https://lobste.rs/s/yow5nr/response_rest_is_new_soap)

