Re: [Jersey] What HATEOAS actually means

From: Paul Sandoz <Paul.Sandoz_at_Sun.COM>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 07:15:13 +0100

On Feb 15, 2010, at 7:35 PM, Jan Algermissen wrote:
> What I am still absolutely not getting is what the 'hypermedia
> pattern' in question is trying to solve. Without intend to insult
> anyone: I think it is just really confusing and feels a bit like
> making REST enterprisey (*feels* like; I am not saying it is)
> Could it be that you guys are thinking more in terms of 'technical
> APIs' such as Sun Cloud while I am at the business level ("submit
> request for shipment" "submit ITIL incident" etc.)?

The "controller URI" approach has definitely influenced our thinking.

However, i do not see why the current approach cannot do some business
level stuff too (although i am not stating that it is the best way for
such business level stuff). The prototype example presents a workflow
to the client via hypermedia, just in a different form to links in
documents. Maybe what you are saying is this approach does not work
very well for business level requirements?

I must admit to having trouble understanding what you do not
understand :-) so this brings me back to the need for an equivalent
concrete example and then we can compare. Plus having a voice to voice
or face to face chat would i think clear up a lot of matters.

> Hmm, interestingly I have worked last year on such a technical API,
> including things like explicit locking and what I came up with is
> maybe (will check) pretty comparable to what you guys are doing.

Ah, this could be good news :-)

So we may have two use cases: "technical APIs" (for want of a better
word); and "business level process".