If REST is "not even approximately" coupled to HTTP, then how do you explain that people attempt to use the fixed set of CRUD-type of verbs (GET, POST, etc.)? Just a coincidence I guess. lol.
> If REST is "not even approximately" coupled to HTTP, then how do you explain that people attempt to use the fixed set of CRUD-type of verbs (GET, POST, etc.)?
REST over HTTP uses standard HTTP methods with their HTTP-defined semantics rather than unnecessary ad hoc, API-specific extensions because, well, first, why would you do anything else if you want to use a standardized underlying protocol? And second because: “A REST API should not contain any changes to the communication protocols aside from filling-out or fixing the details of underspecified bits of standard protocols, [...]” https://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be-hypert...
I consider HTTP the 'pipe' over which the data is marshalled. It has it's own error codes, it's own verbs, and it's own protocol that has nothing whatsoever to do with my API for my APP and that's the way I want to keep it.
I do an HTTP "post" to send up a JSON object as a request, and I get a JSON object back as the reply. No one is going to tell me there's a "simpler" way. There isn't.
For example, if I need to delete data, I'll call "deleteSomething" as an endpoint. I could care less if HTTP has a delete in it's language, because I don't want/need any of that coupled into my API or affecting my API in any way whatsoever.
That way my API can be moved to some non-HTTP pipe at some point and it will remain unchanged. It's just like how in good OOP you ideally code to 'interfaces' rather than coding to 'objects' directly.
You can tell it's perfectly type-safe on both client (TypeScript) and server (Java), and the API itself doesn't have any clue it's even be running over HTTP, and that's a good thing.
I'm not sure what your point is. Yes, RPC over HTTP post is a perfectly valid style of API. It's not REST. It may in some sense be simpler, but being simple for a narrow interface isn't the hallmark of REST (being simple on an “across a whole world wide network of diverse resources that don't share common ownership and control” is more REST’s thing.)
My entire discussion has been around the assumption that there's some very specific WebApp that needs to communicate to a server (likely over HTTP too), and that I like RPC and verbs in my API.
What you seem to be stating is that there's more to that on the web and that HTTP has a reason to exist. I agree. It makes sense for the language of the browser itself to be basic CRUD-type calls to servers (which is what HTTP is)
But for a specific RPC interface for a specific WebApp client, trying to meld THAT API into HTTP (the goal of REST) is awkward as all hell and that IS what everyone's using it for.
