@wycats @steveklabnik (Final thought on this: Ember might not fall into the misunderstanding REST category, most other JS client libs do)
@wycats I'm quite unlikely to accuse @steveklabnik of misunderstanding REST :-) More discussions another time.
@wycats @steveklabnik Fair point. For most scenarios I'm involved with, what you consider insufficient would be an amazing step forward
3
@wycats @steveklabnik We just have differing opinions on what's good enough. Or more likely, different use cases.
@wycats @steveklabnik Not in general, no; I just have a hard time justifying a specific one where I consider the generic one "good enough"
1
@wycats @steveklabnik I don't consider myself part of that crowd, but yes, I've found the browser to be a very good REST client role model
2
@wycats @steveklabnik Of course I do not mean this literally. A follow-up in more than 140 characters might be useful.
1
@steveklabnik @mamund @seantallen @pkeane If you "do it right", my guess is you'll ultimately end up reimplementing the browser
1
1
@IngmarKrusch Pls email me (in German if you like): stefan.tilkov@innoq.com
My take on the Rails API project: Even though I don't care for JS SPAs at all, it's awesome to have a project like this for RESTful services
“Introducing the Rails API Project”: blog.steveklabnik.com/posts/…
4
4
@clemensv Which is not at all reflected in the message they show.
@clemensv I get your point. I'm just saying that Google accepts GEMA's claims but does not want to pay what they ask for.
@clemensv As much as I hate GEMA, this is a case of Google and GEMA not agreeing on prices. Not sure why to take sides here.
2
“Your happiness and the smiles on the faces of your loved ones are very dear things to Ministry of Interior” heise.de/newsticker/meldung/…
1