> looking at the URI the consumer must understand all about the given resource Just because? No. > The HTTP methods must be used to give the intent of the act

> looking at the URI the consumer must understand all about the given resource Just because? No. > The HTTP methods must be used to give the intent of the action that is happening. That interpretation (PATCH, DELETE, etc) is not "correct", which is endlessly maddening. It was a possible scheme, just like a waterfall process was a possible development scheme. There is no correctness implied. See: http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch_style.htm http://www.ics.uci.edu/~fielding/pubs/dissertation/rest_arch..., http://cafe.elharo.com/web/why-rest-failed/ http://cafe.elharo.com/web/why-rest-failed/, http://www.artima.com/lejava/articles/why_put_and_delete.html http://www.artima.com/lejava/articles/why_put_and_delete.htm..., http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2009/it-is-okay-to-use-post http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2009/it-is-okay-to-use-post I really get sick of these purity guidelines that have no practical use other than to say "see, it works" which isn't compelling.