Paul Snively replies to yesterday's exploratory post regarding RPC vs. REST. I'd say I feel confident that the issues are explored.
I'd say the best thing REST advocates can do is make the tools as simple to use as the approx. 100 implementations of XML-RPC and SOAP. The URI part of the argument, with the corresponding issues, does make sense, and all things considered, I would side with the REST side of issue.
Paul: 'I feel the need to put a verbal stake in the ground and say that choosing RPC over REST is choosing worse over better, and that such decisions will not be revisited, so be very careful about the areas that are hardest to predict, such as scalability, cachability, and the like, before making large deployments based on an RPC architecture.'
But I don't feel it so strongly that I'm going to stop using RPC (which I know Paul is not asking for); it's here and a lot better then nothing. Give me the tools and a choice, though, and I would probably go REST preferentially. URIs have a lot of advantages to them, as Paul enumerates.