Re: conneg considered harmful

Peter Williams <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.web.services.rest
Message-ID <CAK5VdzxTWO=MabzhLFaGU-LUCb60PK8GDXHBXXMqE6n9idwqPg@mail.gmail.com>
Eric,

That is an interesting quote. I have occasionally heard
unsubstantiated claims regarding the badness of accept header based
content negotiation. It is interesting that Roy perceives it as
"revolting".

Personally, i rather like it but perhaps i am missing something
important. I'd definitely like to hear someone (or multiple someones)
actually articulate what they perceive as problematic about it. So far
i don't recall ever reading a discussion of the downsides that got
beyond "i don't like it" or "it is hard for me to implement" (neither
of which resonate with me).

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:04 AM, Eric J. Bowman <[email protected]> wrote:
> Mark Baker wrote:
>>
>> Besides, client driven uses hypermedia so is way more RESTful.

Mark, can you explain a bit more why you think this? It is not clear
to me why avoiding this particular part of http's uniform interface
would make a client more RESTful.

Peter
barelyenough.org
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.