Re: [rest-discuss] Objects at REST...

[Steve Bjorg <steveb@mindtouch.com>]

On Mar 12, 2008, at 2:42 PM, Andrzej Jan Taramina wrote:

>> Second, I know I am in the minority here, but pretty URIs are  
>> irrelevant. ...
>
> I'm a bit ambivalent on this comment.  Machine to machine, pretty  
> URI's are
> quite irrelevant.  But when it comes to testing machine to machine
> integrations, debugging and the like, which is conducted by  
> meatware, pretty
> URI's can provide some real productivity and value. (snip)  So why  
> not make 'em pretty....doesn't take much more
> effort and can have some decent payback.

There are graduations of this.  For instance, URIs used on  
spaces.live.com are SO machine focused that it causes gag reflexes to  
visitors. :)

I agree with you 100% that it is a nice thing to have (especially  
when you need to look under the hood).  I only use (and sometimes  
abuse) REST for machine to machine interactions.  In that context,  
"pretty" doesn't scale as services are dynamically generated and  
assembled.

> So what you are saying is that the exposed interfaces and common  
> lingua
> franca between such services/apps is what is key.  I subscribe to  
> that,
> especially in the integration space.

Yes.  That's exactly it.

> Nicely put, Steve!

Thanks!  When I reposted it on my blog, I realized how poor my  
command of grammar is before morning coffee. :)  So thanks for  
powering through it!
A cleaned up version is here:
http://www.mindtouch.com/blog/2008/03/12/objects-at-unrest/

Also, for the curious, a primer on how we build our software using  
RESTful services is here:
http://wiki.mindtouch.com/Technology


Cheers,

- Steve

--------------
Steve G. Bjorg
http://wiki.mindtouch.com
http://wiki.opengarden.org