REST Simplicity

, Aug 16, 2008

Bill de hÓra on REST and simplicity:

REST is not that simple; you can fit the basics into a few slides, but it's purpose is to induce simplicity into the right places, not be simple. [...] There is a hype cycle around REST, which will be a problem for a while and then it will go away as hype cycles do. [...] I think somtimes that the problem people have with REST is that it's so well-defined; it's not witchcraft, it's not a cargo cult. You can't argue with it on a relativistic basis or apply clever rhetoric or continously redefine what it means.  An architectural styles isn't "good" or "bad" - you have to decide if it's the right fit for your problem space and if not, you have to come up with a more appropriate one.

I couldn't agree more (funny to read that old entry; I still believe at least some of what I wrote back then).

On August 16, 2008 11:42 PM, Aristotle Pagaltzis said:

Heh, it’s quite a trip to read that. GET ugly? Scalability via uniform interface debatable? That was quite a different Stefan. :-)