The worth of that guarantee depends on what that amount is. If the utility-based price is 1% of the price I paid for the gold, then I'm still ruined; it might as well be 0%.
1,293 karma · joined August 14, 2007
The worth of that guarantee depends on what that amount is. If the utility-based price is 1% of the price I paid for the gold, then I'm still ruined; it might as well be 0%.
git diff --ignore-space-at-eol(It doesn't matter, but I also raised an eyebrow and started looking for the date on the blog entry when I read that sentence.)
Then you need to have another resource that encompasses the aspects that need to be changed. Sometimes resources have to be somewhat abstract.
> since certain aspects of the API (like honk horn) are unfit for REST, does it make sense to have the other parts of the API in REST?
If the application benefits from the constraints that REST provides then why wouldn't it make sense? It's still one API, "honk" and "flash" don't need to be walled off from the other elements of the API in any way.
You would GET the lock to see if it's locked, GET the battery to read its charging state.
You could PUT to the battery (or to some more abstract, finer-grained resources) to set the charge mode and turn charging on and off. The HVAC and thermostat would work the same way.
The only tricky stuff is "flash lights" and "honk horn"; they're inherently commands, so you might as well implement them in the RPC style that Tesla has used. They can't benefit from anything REST has to offer anyways.
XML's extensibility is one of the reasons that XMPP has so many XEPs. A JSON-based protocol would need a central registry or some kind of namespaces to achieve the same thing.
Engaging in productive discourse is not associated with knowing the names of fallacies.
Read Christoper Lasch instead.
- the interaction is of a short, definite length. I will probably never see you again if I don't want to.
- the number of real-life encounters I can have in a day are limited by my location in space and time. it's fun to have that happen once a day; I imagine the joy wears off when it's happening 30 times.
That's funny, because DHH's proud ignorance about hypermedia strikes me as parallel to the usual proud ignorance about the semantic web.
Your first 2 paragraphs don't actually say anything, they just signal your allegiances.
"The idea that you can write one client to access multiple different APIs" is a straw man.
The connection he's making between HAL and WS-* is ridiculous.
> I think the original idea behind discoverability was that you could have a “RESTful client” that could in theory work with any REST service that implemented discoverability.
Your analysis of that conclusion makes sense (a generic API browser is not very useful), but why did you think that's "the original idea behind discoverability"?
The BitNative article you link to gives the reason that is usually cited for using hypermedia:
> This allows the API to be highly evolvable because it avoids creating a coupling between the client and the server.
Even more important IMO is that it makes it easier for the many different parties to serve the same API.
"Awful" isn't a reversal of meaning, it's a narrowing of meaning.
> Bolt - run away or secure in place
These are homynyms, not divergent meanings. A crossbow bolt is fast, a door bolt is secure.
> Cleave - cut or join
These appear to have converged from the separate Old English verbs "cleofan" and "clifian": http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&s...
(Interestingly, "literally" has been misused to mean its opposite since at least the 1680s: http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=literally&allow... . We've held off the "it means just what I choose it to mean" hordes so far, why give up now?)
That is never the implication of that standard comment.
It doesn't have to be unusual, it just has to vary slightly from machine to machine. It's the specific combination of those slight variations that's unusual.