• To: xml-dev@l...
• Subject: Re: REST has too many verbs
• From: Gavin Thomas Nicol <gtn@r...>
• Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2002 17:19:27 -0500
• In-reply-to: <200202112151.QAA09003@m...>
• Organization: Red Bridge Interactive, Inc.
• References: <200202112151.QAA09003@m...>

On Monday 11 February 2002 04:51 pm, Mark Baker wrote:
> There are many application protocols that retrieve stuff; FTP, IMAP,
> NNTP, SMTP (VRFY & EXPN, for example).  To generalize those into
> "GET", plus a URI to identify what is being "gotten", was a stroke
> of brilliance. 

I think it's questionable whether the unification has more to do with 
GET than with URI's themselves. FWIW. The unification happened a long 
time ago, before the WWW.... in the old days, email-><whatever> 
gateways existed.... I used them all the time to circumvent firewall 
policies ;-)

> getFile(), getName(), getArticle(), getStockQuote() were what we had
> *before* the Web.  I can't see any reason to go back after seeing
> what can be achieved with GET.

What does that have to do with REST then?

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: REST has too many verbs
    • From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
  • Re: REST has too many verbs
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• References:
  • Re: REST has too many verbs
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• Prev by Date: Re: REST has too many verbs
• Next by Date: Re: REST has too many verbs
• Previous by thread: RE: REST has too many verbs
• Next by thread: Re: REST has too many verbs
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread