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