Re: conneg considered harmful

On Fri, Jun 7, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Eric J. Bowman <[email protected]>wrote:

> **
>
>
> >
> > BTW - i'd be happy to see user-agents support client-driven
> > negotiation. i used to think this meant common browsers MUST be the
> > leaders for a feature like this. but recently i've started to think
>  > that native-built mobile clients could start to turn the tide on what
> > features show up in the pipeline.
> >
>
> +1, and +1 to [1] and [2] while I'm at it...
>
> Browsers are truly becoming their own, undefined architecture. REST
> may become unfeasible as a model for browser-based system performance,
> which hardly means it won't continue to be the ideal, or that resources
> will cease to exist as an abstract concept even if TAG replaces the term
> in AWWW v2.
>

What do you mean by 'undefined'? Running code has definitive behaviour:
http://caniuse.com/

What is it, specifically, that you feel may be about to render browsers
infeasible as the basis for a RESTful system?

Is there anything missing that would make it feasible and if so why is it
missing? e.g. why did the efforts to introduce PUT and DELETE to <form>
fail?

fwiw, I am -1 to this idea of trying to "defend REST" by pursuing a
competing platform on 'native mobile'. It seems like a huge waste of time..
How can you do this without essentially just reproducing something that
does what a browser does already? Surely, it would be better to direct all
that energy towards improving the trajectory of this new, "living" browser
platform? Even if that is a hard slog, it's probably the most likely way of
getting the outcome you want.

Cheers,
M