On 24/02/2009, at 9:02 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
Hi Antony,
On 24 Feb 2009, at 00:34, Antony Blakey wrote:
<flamesuit on>
OTOH, one should use the correct term and not redefine existing
terms to suit one's own purpose. In a tangentially related way, the
use of the term RESTful wrt CouchDB is a marketing abomination.
</flamesuit off>
I've heard that before. CouchDB's core document API is as
RESTful as it gets. But not all of CouchDB's API is RESTful
and it wouldn't even make sense. I don't see any abomination
going on here. Thanks.
Couch's core document API is not RESTful. It doesn't use a specific
media type to define the interpretation of the content, and it uses
externally defined URL structures to effect operations. That's not
RESTful, and I don't think CouchDB should use the term.
My argument in this context is pointless. I know it's not going to
change.
Antony Blakey
--------------------------
CTO, Linkuistics Pty Ltd
Ph: 0438 840 787
The project was so plagued by politics and ego that when the engineers
requested technical oversight, our manager hired a psychologist instead.
-- Ron Avitzur
