|
|
|
|
|
by DSteinmann
3516 days ago
|
|
In the first article you raised two issues about REST: Developers disagree on what it means to be "REST-ful", and HATEOS never took off, despite being the feature that distinguishes REST from other APIs. In the second article you explained that HTML could implement HATEOS. In the third article you argue that GraphQL is the natural progression of REST but its security model is complex to the point of being unsafe. --- The first article, in my opinion, consisted of straw men arguments. The second is understandable. The third made no sense to me. With a system like GraphQL you can use a declarative column-based security model. This is, in my opinion, easier than the imperative stuff you're probably using to make your HTML endpoints secure. With GraphQL you need to set up your security constraints once. With HTML endpoints you need to remember to toggle off certain blocks of HTML for every single request. Is that what you're doing? |
|
I'm glad the second article makes sense.
The core point of the third article is that when you increase the expressive power of a JSON API (with something like GraphQL) you are putting this power in the hand of the end user, not just your developers. This is not the same as giving, for example, full SQL access to your server-side only developer, where the code is executing in a trusted computing environment.