[eklovlfjkeos]

I completely disagree that the "normal" way of doing web development (frameworks such as Rails, Django, and the PHP frameworks) is obsolete. First of all, these frameworks can easily be used to build the Ajax-heavy web apps that the author(s) of the article talk about.

Secondly, search engines don't play too well with the Ajaxy web apps. It's not that you can't make them search engine friendly, it's just that once you do that, there's a bigger need for the "normal" frameworks.

Thirdly, I still prefer languages such as Python or PHP to JavaScript.

[nevinera]

>Secondly, search engines don't play too well with the Ajaxy web apps.

Search engines are for finding content, not for apps. If you have data in your app that a search engine could reasonably want to index, give it a resourceful route of some kind, and tell engines where to look - if that doesn't make sense, it's probably not a resource an engine would be interested in.

[eklovlfjkeos]

> Search engines are for finding content, not for apps

I agree, and one of the points that I forgot to write above is that the article seems to focus too much on apps. A lot of web development isn't about apps.

[justincormack]

The article is claiming that we are removing from resources (http, rest) to events, ie apps, for everything. I do think there is still space for the other style done well, with content, but a lot of people seem not to. One of the facets of the web/app war.

[nevinera]

If that's the case (and I don't think that's really what he said), it would be a foolish claim. Resources are fundamental to the human experience. On the web most things are just data, but if that data has value to anyone, it's a resource.

Events are fundamental too, and I'm quite happy that the web seems to be evolving to handle them as well.. But resources will always exist, and any 'event' that has enough data for an engine to be interested in indexing it is carrying a resource.