Richardson Maturity Model
martinfowler.com
Richardson Maturity Model
1–10 of 31 posts
Re: Richardson Maturity Model
#2Level 2 is good for API’s, level 3 is good for hypermedia browsed by a human.
Re: Richardson Maturity Model
#3Level 2 is good for API’s, level 3 is good for hypermedia browsed by a human.
Level 3 combined with HTML fragments as the response representation (rather than JSON or XML) is the fundamental idea behind many "HTML over the wire" toolkits such as HTMX.
Re: Richardson Maturity Model
#4I would love to see some real world use cases of level 3, both for machine to machine use and for human to machine use.
Re: Richardson Maturity Model
#5Calling an API without hypermedia a “level two REST API” is like calling a lettuce and tomato sandwich a “level two BLT”. You’re missing an intrinsic piece of the puzzle and anybody actually expecting a BLT is going to be disappointed.
Why are people so adamant that they absolutely must call non-REST APIs “REST”? Names are free, you don’t have to hijack the name of something else!
Re: Richardson Maturity Model
#6I'll say that the religious approach some take with REST is weird to me. Apparently there's some promised utopia behind getting REST perfect but in the end, nobody does it right but everybody makes it work for their case
Getting the linkrels back is great, but it is up to your frontend to interpret them and display them back. There is no "magic" there because only humans know what does cancel/change mean, not the computers
Re: Richardson Maturity Model
#7I would love to see some real world use cases of level 3, both for machine to machine use and for human to machine use.
The World-Wide Web.
Re: Richardson Maturity Model
#8Calling an API without hypermedia a “level two REST API” is like calling a lettuce and tomato sandwich a “level two BLT”. You’re missing an intrinsic piece of the puzzle and anybody actually expecting a BLT is going to be disappointed. Why are people so adamant that they absolutely must call non-REST APIs “REST”? Names are free, you don’t have to hijack the name of something else!
> Why are people so adamant that they absolutely must call non-REST APIs “REST”?
It's good for marketing I guess? A while ago REST took on connotations of "simple" and "clean", mostly in comparison to SOAP. So people will probably think more highly of your API if you call it REST.
Re: Richardson Maturity Model
#9Calling an API without hypermedia a “level two REST API” is like calling a lettuce and tomato sandwich a “level two BLT”. You’re missing an intrinsic piece of the puzzle and anybody actually expecting a BLT is going to be disappointed. Why are people so adamant that they absolutely must call non-REST APIs “REST”? Names are free, you don’t have to hijack the name of something else!
> Why are people so adamant that they absolutely must call non-REST APIs “REST”? It's good for marketing I guess? A while ago REST took on connotations of "simple" and "clean", mostly in comparison to SOAP. So people will probably think more highly of your API if you call it REST.
With resume-padding being one aspect of marketing.
Re: Richardson Maturity Model
#10> This allows us to invoke GETs safely any number of times in any order and get the same results each time. An important consequence of this is that it allows any participant in the routing of requests to use caching, which is a key element in making the web perform as well as it does.
What conditions for a restful api does this come in handy?
In most implementations I have had the requests are as quick to figure out if anything has changed as it is to return the result.
The problem is not that a get changes the result, it is a post from some other client has changed it in the interim and you want the freshest data.
Id imagine it is most useful in serving static content that has large payloads, which most of my apis don’t serve.