@steveklabnik @mamund @seantallen @pkeane If you "do it right", my guess is you'll ultimately end up reimplementing the browser
1
1
@stilkov I don’t really even now where to start with this one, but wow. @steveklabnik
1
@wycats @steveklabnik Of course I do not mean this literally. A follow-up in more than 140 characters might be useful.
1
@stilkov I’m just baffled by the “only the browser is *real REST* crowd” @steveklabnik
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
@stilkov It sounds like you are philosophically opposed to other, more special-purpose REST clients. Not REST, opinion. @steveklabnik
2
@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
@stilkov the apps I build and help others build don’t have the luxury of “good enough” @steveklabnik
1
@wycats @steveklabnik Fair point. For most scenarios I'm involved with, what you consider insufficient would be an amazing step forward
3
@stilkov Optimally, I would like to be able to have a application/ember-data media type. Enough tweets for now :P @steveklabnik
1
@wycats I'm quite unlikely to accuse @steveklabnik of misunderstanding REST :-) More discussions another time.
Nov 27, 2012 · 7:46 AM UTC