Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Paul Prescod wrote, > Rich doesn't have a choice so I'm not going to criticize him for not > using REST. I'm just pointing out that it isn't a failing of REST > that it cannot do the exact opposite of what it was designed to do. > It's like asking for an object modeling style that doesn't require > you to use objects. ;) > > He can't afford to pay the price of REST and he won't get the > benefits. A perfectly legitimate engineering choice. I'm afraid that doesn't wash. The law isn't arbitrarily and unreasonably frustrating the ambitions of RESTians ... the law is mandating good security practices. If REST/HTTP isn't up to the job, then so much the worse for REST/HTTP. But as I said, I don't believe this is a problem with REST per se. Rather then blaming legislators or accusing security practicioners of advocating proprietary protocols, why not try and show how RESTful principles can be applied end-to-end in this kind of scenario without having to trust an intermediary HTTP server? Cheers, Miles
|
