I think discovery will slowly change over time. You can do attachments via the multipart/form-data content-type header.
The most formal concept of contracts which some organisations ignore is the http method concept where create = put, update = post, read = get, delete = delete. The main area where REST is a pain is formal patterns for security, everyone seems to have their own approach and If you're writing WCF SOAP services already, it shouldn't be hard to implement REST as you just need to add a few attributes to your service contracts and you should be up and going with REST in no time. From: ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com [mailto:ozdotnet-boun...@ozdotnet.com] On Behalf Of Greg Keogh Sent: Monday, 20 June 2011 2:26 PM To: 'ozDotNet' Subject: RE: REST call (obvious solution) Take a look at http://geeknizer.com/rest-vs-soap-using-http-choosing-the-right-webservice-p rotocol/ for more a good comparison. Yes, that's a nice summary. I personally have no need for REST at the moment as everything I'm working on for business is Microsoft-ish, but I'll keep it in mind for possible future scenarios where I have to be really open to the world. I've been playing with the Rackspace REST API over the last week and it's obvious to me now why they provide a REST API and nothing else, as they don't want any bother about who their clients are, you just stuff a request into port 443 by whatever means you have at your disposal and hope for the best! It's just a shame that REST doesn't have any formal concept of contracts, discovery or attachments like SOAP. Greg
