Well, this inevitable flamewar will be a nice change from the pro-AI / anti-AI comment threads, at least...
I thought we were back in 2012 for a second after I read the title
What it means for an API to be RESTful
11–20 of 59 posts
Re: What it means for an API to be RESTful
#12The most bulletproof way to get a bunch of people on the internet to read your stuff is to tell them they're all wrong, never fails.
Re: What it means for an API to be RESTful
#13Well, this inevitable flamewar will be a nice change from the pro-AI / anti-AI comment threads, at least...
Maybe somebody should comment in this thread about GraphQL being better than RESTful API's - then I'd really feel right at home back in 2014
Re: What it means for an API to be RESTful
#14Isn't this well defined already? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/REST > REST (Representational State Transfer) is a software architectural style that was created to describe the design and guide the development of the architecture for the World Wide Web. REST defines a set of constraints for how the architecture of a distributed, Internet-scale hypermedia system, such as the Web, should behave. And isn't it always misu…
> And isn't it always misused, mis-represented basically all the time? Often confused with things that are basically just JSON API(s)? The article makes this point.
I could be wrong, but I also think the article kind of gets it wrong too
Re: What it means for an API to be RESTful
#15Here is how REST came to mean the opposite of REST:
https://htmx.org/essays/how-did-rest-come-to-mean-the-opposi...
And here is why REST is probably largely pointless in machine-to-machine APIs:
https://intercoolerjs.org/2016/05/08/hatoeas-is-for-humans.h...
Re: What it means for an API to be RESTful
#16> They usually live under the _links parent.
The example given in this section... is there actually a commonly used REST api that uses that particular key/structure? I wouldn't be _surprised_ if I came across that in some random API's documentation, but I hardly think it's the 'usual' thing to do.
The article later claims that that style is from https://stateless.co/hal_specification.html , which I think is a consultancy company whose major partners are all casinos (am I totally off on this?). The article also references (https://github.com/kevinswiber/siren which adds detail re: http methods embedded in the _links structure, but I'm not sure why that repo should be considered authoritative. 1300 stars for a just a spec is actually not bad though I think, so maybe.
Overall this article seems like slop produces from some kind of ai crawler that managed to dig up a couple of random links.
I am glad that it mentions rfc9457 though.
Re: What it means for an API to be RESTful
#17[dead]
Re: What it means for an API to be RESTful
#18GET /api/add-a-comment?message=disagree
'(to) comment' is already a verb.
Re: What it means for an API to be RESTful
#19REST seems to bring out people who like to define specs and correct others on following the spec or not. There are many other things in tech like this.
To be honest, I just kind of don't understand the point. Could my API be better following some of these rules the author presented? Probably. But by how much? Is it worth it? When someone else on my team disagrees do we go back and argue about the spec again?
After 12+ years I'm just not sure anymore. If I'm using REST incorrectly (according to this article or others), but getting good results and everyone on the team is aligned, does it matter? I'm willing to have my mind changed this, maybe I'm missing something important