This is a single archived entry from Stefan Tilkov’s blog. For more up-to-date content, check out my author page at INNOQ, which has more information about me and also contains a list of published talks, podcasts, and articles. Or you can check out the full archive.


Stefan Tilkov,

Chris has another post in the continuing MEST permathread, very much worth reading:

Jim, citing the Waldo et al paper, correctly points out how things start collapsing like a house of cards when we fail to heed the collective wisdom in that paper. (Recall the infamous eight fallacies of distributed computing. Anyone designing a distributed system who does not first stop to cherish and grok these words of wisdom should be forced to have a scarlet ‘E’ tattooed on their forehead! But, I digress.).

Although I hold both Jim and Savas in high regard, I have the strange feeling that the MEST label, introduced because of the aimed similarity with REST, causes more trouble than benefit.

On February 8, 2005 10:32 AM, Jim Webber said:

Hey Stefan,

It used to be called “ProcessMessage” if you recall, but it clearly owes so much to the thinking behind REST (and its advocates) that we felt we should pay homage with our naming.


On February 8, 2005 11:12 AM, Stefan Tilkov said:

Hi Jim - yes, I do recall that. In fact, I kind of followed MEST from its inception through the various discussions it went through … My point, though, is that the similarity hinted at by the naming is not that large, and that in fact you and Savas are “just” (no offence intended) following what many second generation WS proponents, including myself, perceive to be the right way to do Services.

But I’m very much looking forward to your paper and postpone (semi-)final judgement until then :-)