Re: the meaning of stateless

On Apr 25, 2013, at 10:37 AM, Mark Baker <[email protected]> wrote:
> I hear you, but part of the reason I did that was because I think it's
> not required as often as you claim.

Fair enough.

> As far as batch goes though, as a means of providing atomicity over a
> stateless protocol, no, I can't imagine that it can be done RESTfully.
> Somebody might prove me wrong though as I haven't given it much
> thought.

If Markus Lanthaler's explanation was current then it is resource state and thus actually RESTful.  Or is that wrong?

> If I can say, you seem to be coming from a very solution-driven place,
> where you have a solution in mind and then try to map it back onto
> REST. I would suggest trying the other way; starting only with your
> "business" requirements and moving forward from there, staying within
> the constraints of REST to inform you what a solution might look like.

No, bad assumption. I need examples to understand concepts; it's not possible for me to read abstract concepts like how Roy presents REST in his thesis and actually be able apply them practically unless of course I already understand the concepts, kind of a catch-22, no?  

So, I can't stay within the constraints of REST unless I actually fully understand them and can't understand them without first being able to review and comprehend good examples that apply.

> That's getting to the point, but as I was suggesting to Brian, I don't
> think that's a very productive question to ask.

Well, it's unproductive if you already understand. So IOW you are saying it' a stupid question? Haven't we been socialized to tell learners there are no stupid questions so as not to retard learning? :)  

But seriously, unless you disagree with Markus Lanthaler's "application state vs. resource state" I think I've finally got it figured out.   Also, sincerely, thanks for the help.

-Mike