[eclipxe]

Hmm. I'm not sure I agree that the web is missing a "social content protocol". What would such a protocol actually do?

REST+HTTP are not without their issues, but I'd argue they've been successful in allowing numerous heterogeneous applications to speak with each other, in a reliable and standard fashion for many years.

Compared to more complicated protocols such as SOAP, COBRA, DCOM, etc...REST+HTTP is as reliable and ubiquitous today because of its simplicity and generic nature. Adding features and utilities for a particular aspect (i.e. "social") would serve to weaken the protocol, not make it better.

The argument that the HTML+JS+CSS side of things has turned HTTP into an application environment is a bad thing is puzzling. Besides, what is the point of a content transport protocol if not to provide valuable services and use cases on top of it? We have TCP and UDP to push bits around...

[evv]

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE how HTML5/JS/CSS is now a full application environment. We desperately needed networked applications, but now we have them. It is a great way of creating an interface for users.

But we still need application protocols to allow our apps to communicate with each other, and protocols for such have withered as of late. There are a few patterns most APIs need to re-implement:

- Authentication for actions on behalf of users (user XYZ, who I represent, says this..)

- Rich content format

- Content posting (send a link to somebody)

- Simple feedback (like/follow/upvote/downvote)

For these common inter-application actions, HTTP+HTML falls short.