First, I'm a bit turned off by it's use of the term REST. It's just an HTTP client. Gah, I give up.
I occasionally use postman, but more likely I'm writing a script that I'm going to integrate into my automated testing anyway. Or a simple one-off script with wget. I find that faster to use than a GUI but maybe I'm just getting too settled in my ways.
What was the use case that made you switch to something like this?
And REST is just an HTTP based architecture.
> A REST API should not be dependent on any single communication protocol
http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be-hyperte...
Doesn't matter. Real world usage defines words, not original intended meaning or etymology.
This all can be avoided if people make it as a rule not to reuse names for a new concept Y that is already being used for concept X. What do you see as the reason to reuse names? Do you think we're running out of them?
Obviously, as its a technical term, "majority" here refers to the majority of the respective technical audience, not the majority across all people.
>I also don't see jargon as something that may or may not "catch on", I see it as a way to organize ideas in a professional area so as to ease precise communication.
The best way to "ease precise communication" though is to use a term as it turned out to be used/understood by most people -- not to insist of its initial intended meaning (which in IT could be off by several decades to its modern use).
>This all can be avoided if people make it as a rule not to reuse names for a new concept Y that is already being used for concept X. What do you see as the reason to reuse names? Do you think we're running out of them?
The thing is, REST initially was some random thing some guy wrote. A person totally irrelevant in the grand scheme of things, not some standards body.
REST became a thing and got relevant only after it was adopted by a critical mass, and in the process people used it in different ways, adopted what they liked, etc. Those changes due to impact with real and different uses, reflect into what people call "REST" today.
Once we called "computers" actual humans doing computations [1]. Then it was some huge machines in corporations. Now we can even call our phones that. It would silly to insist that we should keep computers to its meaning at any fixed point in time.
[1] https://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals...
How do we know we're up-to-date with the latest definition? And what if someone disagrees with what is the latest definition? How do we even know what "most" people think is the latest definition? Do you see how your suggestion is unrealistic?
But, your next argument is the strongest here, and I stand corrected. I like your computer example. So I'd say if we deprecate the thing that the word meant before (human computers, or REST as defined by one guy and never used) then it's OK to reuse it. I don't know the REST story and have no reason to doubt your version of it, so thanks for the argument!
Not really the opposite. "RESTful", when it doesn't actually refer to Fielding's REST [0], generally doesn't mean anything, its just an empty buzzword being dropped into a product description that communicates no meaningful information at all. Even then, its seems to be intended to communicate "conforming to the REST architectural style", it just fails to do so because its done without any knowledge of the REST architectural style (and not even with an consistent wrong view such that the use of the term could be said to have a particular definition different from that that Fielding laid out for REST.)
[0] Though, to be fair, it often does, although sometimes to only some particular part of it (and not always the same part) as opposed to systems that lack the part being focused on. This use is somewhat consistent with Fielding's, though it would probably be better to focus on naming the particular element.
Well, it instantly communicates: 1) over HTTP(S), 2) using HTTP queries (and verbs) 3) taking advantage of HTTP authentication, caching etc, 4) returning, more often that not, JSON.
That is, the important parts people care about.
Disclaimer: I'm a Paw guy (founder).