Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Sun, 26 Jan 2003 11:54:17 -0500, Mark Baker <distobj@a...> wrote: > On Sun, Jan 26, 2003 at 01:26:30PM +0000, Miles Sabin wrote: >> Of course, a variation implies a variation on _something_. But it >> doesn't follow that that something is an abstract resource in the REST >> sense. > > Yes, it does follow. That's exactly my point. If it's *something* > then it's a resource. OK. But is this a truth or a truism? A definition or a tautology? A powerful abstraction or a hopelessly leaky abstraction? FWIW, I learned a "code review antipattern" long ago: "If a variable or function has 'thing' or 'stuff' in its label, it's a strong indication that the author doesn't know what exactly it is or is supposed to do." This thread is making me think that 'resource' should be added to that list :-)
|
