I don't see that anywhere in the post. All I saw was "GET"s shouldn't modify sta... | Hacker News

Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit

drivebyacct2 on Nov 20, 2012 | parent | context | favorite | on: When REST isn't Good Enough

I don't see that anywhere in the post. All I saw was "GET"s shouldn't modify state and should be cacheable. That seems perfectly in line with the spec.

jebblue on Nov 20, 2012 [–]

The only problem I have with your comment is that REST is not specified, it's a style:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Representational_state_transfer

Ramone on Nov 21, 2012 | | [–]

GET being cacheable/idempotent is part of the HTTP spec, and has nothing to do with REST: http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616-sec13.html#sec13...

drivebyacct2 on Nov 20, 2012 | | [–]

I meant the HTTP spec which is where GETs specified.

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact