Skip navigation

This is Volume 28 of This week in REST, for Oct 20 2010 – Nov 1 2010. For more information on this blog see this post. If I missed an interesting blog post, discussion or paper – just e-mail me the links, tweet or leave a comment on the latest blog post. Thanks!

Around the Web

W3C TAG meeting 19-21 October 2010 – Agenda and minutes from the recent W3C TAG face-to-face meeting are available. Many interesting topics on WWW architecture were discussed over the three days.

type|use semantics – “a media type defintion may be able to describe the hypermedia interactions needed in order to make that media type useful in a general way, but that same media type may not be able to describe all the possible implementation-specific interactions for a single “application domain.”” (by Mike Amundsen)

WCF Evolving for the Web – Recording of Glenn Block’s talk at E-VAN on 18 October 2010. More about WCF supporting RESTful HTTP here (by Darrel Miller) and here (video recording of Glenn’s talk at MSFT PDC10).

httpbis -12 drafts – New HTTPbis drafts are available.

Code on Demand – “Thanks to efforts like nodejs, server-side Javascript is getting mainstream. Now code-on-demand on the server side is easy. The idea of code-on-demand is simple. The server extends the functionality of the client by sending back code that the client needs to execute.” (by Subbu Allamaraju)

The Web of Things and Sun SPOTs – Slides for a recent presentation on the Web of Things and Sun SPOTs. (by Vipul Gupta)

Web Linking specification reaches RFC status in standards track – “This document specifies relation types for Web links, and defines a registry for them. It also defines the use of such links in HTTP headers with the Link header field.”

Constraints: REST vs. Real Life – “Beware deviating from the path of The Architectural Constraints!” (by Ray Polk)

REST discussion group

Integration “Connector Types” – “…a comparison of the amount of coupling of various connector types”

4 Verbs and CRUD – “It seems like everything now is just CRUD (i.e., Create/Read/Update/Delete)using the 4 HTTP request types. This is good, simple, and gets you a long way.But is everything just CRUD? Isn’t that too limiting? What about situationswhere CRUD isn’t sophisticated enough or just doesn’t fit with what you’retrying to do?”

Fledgling REST blogger looking for suggestions and feedback – Nice introduction of a new RESTafarian blogger with a link to a recent post by Roy Fielding on what the difference between resource state and application state is.

Interesting tweets

@AndrewWahbe – “Links afford clicking, they don’t afford GETing. It is the role of hypermedia to make that translation.”

@dret – “wondering how may “apps” are essentially crippled browsers, i.e. chrome-less rendering for pre-configured URIs and not much else.”

@AndrewWahbe – “Considering a Conditional GET model for Halloween — you only get the candy if you don’t already have some that’s the same”

@sgillies – “@AndrewWahbe Yes. Or a 302 “get your candy next door”.”

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: