[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

Re: REST as RPC done right

• To: simonstl@s... (Simon St.Laurent)
• Subject: Re: REST as RPC done right
• From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>
• Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2002 12:33:46 -0500 (EST)
• Cc: xml-dev@l...
• In-reply-to: <1014828130.2260.68.camel@l...> from "Simon St.Laurent" at Feb 27, 2002 11:42:10 AM

> Is it fair to describe REST as RPC done right?

I could pick nits, but won't.  Sure, it's fair.

The expressiveness of GET/PUT/POST/DELETE is enormous of course,
but HTTP and REST *do* support the addition of other methods.
So it's really more RPC like than even I like to suggest. 8-O

The architectural constraint that components have identity is
important, but OORPC also has that.  The additional constraint
that makes all the difference is that the methods must be
generic and apply to *all* things with identity, unlike OORPC
where methods were specific to each thing.

For example, if you had a dog, OORPC would model it as;

interface dog
{
 getName();
 getBreed();
 pet();
 walk();
 feed();
}

whereas REST models it as;

interface
{
  GET()
  PUT()
  POST()
  DELETE()
  [other method name]
}

(you knew that, I was just describing it for others)

MB
-- 
Mark Baker, Chief Science Officer, Planetfred, Inc.
Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.      mbaker@p...
http://www.markbaker.ca   http://www.planetfred.com

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: REST as RPC done right
    • From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>

• References:
  • REST as RPC done right
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• Prev by Date: RE: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
• Next by Date: Re: MS thinks HTTP Needs Replacing???
• Previous by thread: Re: REST as RPC done right
• Next by thread: Re: REST as RPC done right
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread