WS-* vs. RESTful Services

1. WS-* vs. RESTful Services Cesare Pautasso Faculty of Informatics, USI Lugano, Switzerland c.pautasso@ieee.org http://www.pautasso.info http://twitter.com/pautasso 30.6.2010

2. Abstract Recent technology trends in Web Services indicate that a solution eliminating the perceived complexity of the WS-* standard technology stack may be in sight: advocates of REpresentational State Transfer (REST) have come to believe that their ideas explaining why the World Wide Web works are just as applicable to solve enterprise application integration problems and to radically simplify the plumbing required to build service-oriented architectures. In this tutorial we take a scientific look at the WS-* vs. REST debate by presenting a technical comparison based on architectural principles and decisions. We show that the two approaches differ in the number of architectural decisions that must be made and in the number of available alternatives. This discrepancy between freedom-from-choice and freedom-of-choice quantitatively explains the perceived complexity difference. We also show that there are significant differences in the consequences of certain decisions in terms of resulting development and maintenance costs. Our comparison helps technical decision makers to assess the two integration technologies more objectively and select the one that best fits their needs: REST is well suited for basic, ad hoc integration scenarios à la mashup, WS-* is more mature and addresses advanced quality of service requirements commonly found in enterprise computing. ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 2

3. About Cesare Pautasso • Assistant Professor at the Faculty of Informatics, University of Lugano, Switzerland (since Sept 2007) • Research Projects: • SOSOA – Self-Organizing Service Oriented Architectures • CLAVOS – Continuous Lifelong Analysis and Verification of Open Services • BPEL for REST • Researcher at IBM Zurich Research Lab (2007) • Post-Doc at ETH Zürich • Software: JOpera: Process Support for more than Web services http://www.jopera.org/ • Ph.D. at ETH Zürich, Switzerland (2004) • Laurea Politecnico di Milano (2000) • Representations: http://www.pautasso.info/ (Web) http://twitter.com/pautasso/ (Twitter Feed) ©2010 Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 3

11. REST in one slide  Web Services expose their data and functionality trough PUT resources identified by URI R  Uniform Interface Principle: GET Clients interact with resources POST through a fix set of verbs. DELETE Example HTTP: GET (read), POST (create), PUT (update), DELETE  Multiple representations for the same resource  Hyperlinks model resource relationships and valid state transitions for dynamic protocol description and discovery ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 11

12. URI - Uniform Resource Identifier  Internet Standard for resource naming and identification (originally from 1994, revised until 2005)  Examples: http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986 URI Scheme Authority Path https://www.google.ch/search?q=rest&start=10#1 Query Fragment  REST does not advocate the use of “nice” URIs  In most HTTP stacks URIs cannot have arbitrary length (4Kb)  #Fragments are not even sent to the server ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 12

13. What is a “nice” URI? A RESTful service is much more than just a set of nice URIs http://map.search.ch/lugano http://maps.google.com/lugano http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=lugano, +switzerland&layer=&ie=UTF8&z=12&om=1&iwloc=addr ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 13

14. URI Design Guidelines  Prefer Nouns to Verbs GET /book?isbn=24&action=delete  Keep your URIs short DELETE /book/24  If possible follow a “positional” parameter-  Note: REST URIs are opaque passing scheme for identifiers that are meant to algorithmic resource query be discovered by following strings (instead of the hyperlinks and not key=value&p=v encoding) constructed by the client  Some use URI postfixes to  This may break the specify the content type abstraction  Do not change URIs  Warning: URI Templates  Use redirection if you really introduce coupling between need to change them client and server ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 14

15. URI Templates  URI Templates specify how to construct and parse parametric URIs.  On the service they are often used to configure “routing rules”  On the client they are used to instantiate URIs from local parameters parameters URI URI Template URI Template client service URI parameters  Do not hardcode URIs in the client!  Do not hardcode URI templates in the client!  Reduce coupling by fetching the URI template from the service dynamically and fill them out on the client ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 15

16. URI Template Examples  From http://bitworking.org/projects/URI-Templates/  Template: http://www.myservice.com/order/{oid}/item/{iid}  Example URI: http://www.myservice.com/order/XYZ/item/12345  Template: http://www.google.com/search?{-join|&|q,num}  Example URI: http://www.google.com/search?q=REST&num=10 ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 16

17. Uniform Interface Constraint IDEM HTTP SAFE POTENT Create a POST sub resource NO NO Retrieve the current GET state of the resource YES YES Initialize or update the state of a PUT resource NO YES at the given URI Clear a resource, DELETE after the URI is no NO YES longer valid ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 17

18. POST vs. GET  GET is a read-only operation. It can be repeated without affecting the state of the resource (idempotent) and can be cached. Note: this does not mean that the same representation will be returned every time. Web browsers warn  POST is a read-write you when refreshing operation and may change a page generated the state of the resource and with POST provoke side effects on the server. ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 18

19. POST vs. PUT What is the right way of creating resources (initialize their state)? PUT /resource/{id} 201 Created Problem: How to ensure resource {id} is unique? (Resources can be created by multiple clients concurrently) Solution 1: let the client choose a unique id (e.g., GUID) POST /resource 301 Moved Permanently Location: /resource/{id} Solution 2: let the server compute the unique id Problem: Duplicate instances may be created if requests are repeated due to unreliable communication ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 19

21. Basic Setup HTTP User Agent Origin Server Adding Caching HTTP HTTP Caching Origin Server User Agent Caching User Agent Origin Server HTTP Caching Caching User Agent Origin Server ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 21

22. Proxy or Gateway? Intermediaries forward (and may translate) requests and responses HTTP HTTP Client Proxy Origin Server A proxy is chosen by the Client (for caching, or access control) HTTP HTTP Client Gateway Origin Server The use of a gateway (or reverse proxy) is imposed by the server ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 22

23. Design Methodology 1. Identify resources to be exposed as services (e.g., yearly risk report, book DELETE catalog, purchase order, open bugs, POST polls and votes) GET PUT 2. Model relationships (e.g., containment, reference, state transitions) between /loan     resources with hyperlinks that can be followed to get more details (or perform /balance     state transitions) /client     3. Define “nice” URIs to address the resources /book     4. Understand what it means to do a GET, POST, PUT, DELETE for each resource /order  ?   (and whether it is allowed or not) 5. Design and document resource representations /soap     6. Implement and deploy on Web server 7. Test with a Web browser ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 23

25. Simple Doodle API Example 1. Resources: DELETE polls and votes POST 2. Containment Relationship: GET PUT poll /poll     {id1} /poll/{id}     vote /poll/{id}/vote     {id4} /poll/{id}/vote/{id}    ? {id5} 3. URIs embed IDs of “child” instance resources 4. POST on the container is used to {id2} create child resources 5. PUT/DELETE for updating and {id3} removing child resources ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 25

26. Simple Doodle API Example 1. Creating a poll (transfer the state of a new poll on the Doodle service) /poll /poll/090331x /poll/090331x/vote POST /poll GET /poll/090331x <options>A,B,C</options> 200 OK 201 Created <options>A,B,C</options> Location: /poll/090331x <votes href=“/vote”/> 2. Reading a poll (transfer the state of the poll from the Doodle service) ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 26

27. Simple Doodle API Example  Participating in a poll by creating a new vote sub-resource /poll /poll/090331x /poll/090331x/vote /poll/090331x/vote/1 POST /poll/090331x/vote GET /poll/090331x <name>C. Pautasso</name> <choice>B</choice> 200 OK <options>A,B,C</options> 201 Created <votes><vote id=“1”> Location: <name>C. Pautasso</name> /poll/090331x/vote/1 <choice>B</choice> </vote></votes> ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 27

28. Simple Doodle API Example  Existing votes can be updated (access control headers not shown) /poll /poll/090331x /poll/090331x/vote /poll/090331x/vote/1 PUT /poll/090331x/vote/1 GET /poll/090331x <name>C. Pautasso</name> <choice>C</choice> 200 OK <options>A,B,C</options> 200 OK <votes><vote id=“/1”> <name>C. Pautasso</name> <choice>C</choice> </vote></votes> ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 28

29. Simple Doodle API Example  Polls can be deleted once a decision has been made /poll /poll/090331x /poll/090331x/vote /poll/090331x/vote/1 DELETE /poll/090331x GET /poll/090331x 200 OK 404 Not Found ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 29

30. The End to End View R GET C A B PUT GET  The resource acts as an communication medium that allows services to exchange representations of their state  This is not equivalent to sending and receiving messages from a bus ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 30

31. Real Doodle Demo • Info on the real Doodle API: http://doodle.com/xsd1/RESTfulDoodle.pdf • Lightweight demo with Poster Firefox Extension: http://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/2691 ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 31

32. 1. Create Poll POST http://doodle-test.com/api1WithoutAccessControl/polls/ Content-Type: application/xml <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><poll xmlns="http://doodle.com/xsd1"><type>TEXT</type><extensions rowConstraint="1"/><hidden>false</hidden><writeOnce>false</writeOnce ><requireAddress>false</requireAddress><requireEMail>false</requireEM ail><requirePhone>false</requirePhone><byInvitationOnly>false</byInvitat ionOnly><levels>2</levels><state>OPEN</state><title>How is the tutorial going?</title><description></description><initiator><name>Cesare Pautasso</name><userId></userId><eMailAddress>test@jopera.org</eM ailAddress></initiator><options><option>too fast</option><option>right speed</option><option>too slow</option></options><participants></participants><comments></com ments></poll> Content-Location: {id} GET http://doodle-test.com/api1WithoutAccessControl/polls/{id} ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 32

33. 2. Vote POST http://doodle-test.com/api1WithoutAccessControl/polls/{id}/participants Content-Type: application/xml <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <participant xmlns="http://doodle.com/xsd1"><name>Cesare Pautasso</name><preferences><option>0</option><option>1</option>< option>0</option></preferences></participant> ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 33

35. Richardson Maturity Model 0. HTTP as an RPC Protocol (Tunnel POST+POX or POST+JSON) I. Multiple Resource URIs (Fine-Grained Global Addressability) II. Uniform HTTP Verbs (Contract Standardization) III. Hypermedia (Protocol Discoverability)  A REST API needs to include levels I, II, III  Degrees of RESTfulness? ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 35

36. HTTP as a tunnel  Tunnel through one HTTP Method GET /api?method=addCustomer&name=Wilde GET /api?method=deleteCustomer&id=42 GET /api?method=getCustomerName&id=42 GET /api?method=findCustomers&name=Wilde*  Everything through GET • Advantage: Easy to test from a Browser address bar (the “action” is represented in the resource URI) • Problem: GET should only be used for read-only (= idempotent and safe) requests. What happens if you bookmark one of those links? • Limitation: Requests can only send up to approx. 4KB of data (414 Request-URI Too Long) ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 36

37. HTTP as a tunnel  Tunnel through one HTTP Method  Everything through POST • Advantage: Can upload/download an arbitrary amount of data (this is what SOAP or XML-RPC do) • Problem: POST is not idempotent and is unsafe (cannot cache and should only be used for “dangerous” requests) POST /service/endpoint <soap:Envelope> <soap:Body> <findCustomers> <name>Pautasso*</name> </findCustomers> </soap:Body> </soap:Envelope> ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 37

42. Architectural Decisions  Architectural decisions Architectural Decision: capture the main design Programming Language issues and the rationale behind a chosen Architecture Alternatives: technical solution 1. Java  The choice between 2. C# REST vs. WS-* is an 3. C++ important architectural 4. C decision for 5. Eiffel Web service design 6. Ruby 7. …  Architectural decisions affect one another Rationale ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 42

44. Decision Space Overview 21 Decisions and 64 alternatives Classified by level of abstraction: • 3 Architectural Principles • 9 Conceptual Decisions • 9 Technology-level Decisions Decisions help us to measure the complexity implied by the choice of REST or WS-* ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 44

45. Comparison Overview 1. Protocol Layering • HTTP = Application-level Protocol (REST) • HTTP = Transport-level Protocol (WS-*) 2. Loose Coupling 3. Dealing with Heterogeneity 4. What about X? 5. (X = Composition) 6. Software Connectors for Integration ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 45

46. RESTful Web Service Example Web Server HTTP Client Database Application Server (Web Browser) SELECT * GET /book?ISBN=222 FROM books WHERE isbn=222 POST /order INSERT INTO orders 301 Location: /order/612 PUT /order/612 UPDATE orders WHERE id=612 ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 46

47. WS-* Service Example (from REST perspective) Web Server Web Service HTTP Client Application Server Implementation (Stub Object) POST /soap/endpoint return getBook(222) POST /soap/endpoint return new Order() POST /soap/endpoint order.setCustomer(x) ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 47

48. Protocol Layering “The Web is the universe of “The Web is the universal globally accessible information” (tunneling) transport for (Tim Berners Lee) messages”  Applications should publish  Applications get a chance their data on the Web to interact but they remain (through URI) “outside of the Web” AtomPub JSON POX … SOAP (WS-*) HTTP HTTP HTTP HTTP HTTP SMTP MQ… GET POST PUT DEL POST (Many) Resource URI 1 Endpoint URI Application Application ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 48

49. Coupling Facets Facets REST WS-*  Discovery  Referral  Centralized  Identification  Global  Context-Based  Binding  Late  Late  Platform  Independent  Independent  Interaction  Asynchronous  Asynchronous  Model  Self-Describing  Shared Model  State  Stateless  Stateless  Generated Code  None/Dynamic  Static  Conversation  Reflective  Explicit More Info on http://dret.net/netdret/docs/loosely-coupled-www2009/ ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 49

51. Dealing with Heterogeneity  Enable Cooperation  Enable Integration  Web Applications  Enterprise Architectures Picture from Eric Newcomer, IONA HTTP CICS IMS ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 51

54. Enterprise “Use Cases” Enterprise Architectures CRUD Services Web-friendly APIs Mobile Services Real-time Services Transactional Services Composite Services ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 54

55. Enterprise “Use Cases” Enterprise Architectures WS-* REST Part of the debate is about how many “enterprise” use cases can be covered with REST as opposed to WS-* ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 55

56. What about…  Service Description  Security  Asynch Messaging  Reliable Messaging  Stateful Services  Service Composition  Transactions  Semantics  SLAs  Governance  … ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 56

57. What about service description?  REST relies on human  Client stubs can be built from readable documentation that WSDL descriptions in most defines requests URIs programming languages templates and responses  Strong typing (XML, JSON media types)  Each service publishes its  Interacting with the service own interface with different means hours of testing and semantics debugging URIs manually  WSDL 1.1 (entire port type built as parameter can be bound to HTTP GET or combinations. (Is is it really HTTP POST or SOAP/HTTP that simpler building URIs by POST or other protocols) hand?)  Why do we need strongly  WSDL 2.0 (more flexible, typed SOAP messages if both each operation can choose sides already agree on the whether to use GET or POST) content? provides a new HTTP binding  WADL proposed Nov. 2006  XForms enough? ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 57

58. What about security?  REST security is all about  SOAP security extensions HTTPS (HTTP + SSL/TLS) defined by WS-Security (from 2004)  Proven track record (SSL1.0 from 1994)  XML Encryption (2002)  HTTP Basic Authentication  XML Signature (2001) (RFC 2617, 1999 RFC 1945, 1996)  Note: These are also applicable with REST when using XML content  Secure, end-to-end  Secure, point to point communication – Self- communication protecting SOAP messages (Authentication, Integrity (does not require HTTPS) and Encryption) ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 58

59. What about asynchronous messaging?  SOAP messages can be  Although HTTP is a transferred using synchronous protocol, asynchronous transport it can be used to “simulate” a protocols and APIs message queue. (like JMS, MQ, …)  WS-Addressing can be used POST /queue to define transport- independent endpoint 202 Accepted references Location:  WS-ReliableExchange defines /queue/message/1230213 a protocol for reliable message delivery based on GET /queue/message/1230213 SOAP headers for message identification and DELETE /queue/message/1230213 acknowledgement ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 59

60. Blocking or Non-Blocking?  HTTP is a synchronous interaction protocol. However, it does not need to be blocking. /slow  A Long running request may time out. POST /slow  The server may answer it with 202 Accepted providing a URI from which 202 Accepted the response can be Location: x retrieved later.  Problem: how often should GET /slow/x the client do the polling? /slow/x could include an 200 OK estimate of the finishing 204 No Content time if not yet completed ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 60

61. What about reliable messaging?  WS-ReliableMessaging  The HTTP uniform interface (or WS-Reliability) define a defines clear exception protocol for reliable message handling semantics delivery based on SOAP  If a failure occurs it is enough headers for message to retry idempotent methods identification and (GET, PUT, DELETE) acknowledgement  With POST, recovery requires  WS-* middleware can ensure an additional reconciliation guaranteed in-order, exactly step (usually done with GET) once message delivery before the request can be semantics retried  POE (POST-Once-Exactly) has  Hint: Reliable Messaging been proposed to also make does not imply reliable POST reliable applications! ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 61

62. What about stateful services?  REST provides explicit state  SOAP services have implicit state transitions transitions  Communication is stateless*  Servers may maintain conversation state across  Resources contain data and multiple message exchanges hyperlinks representing valid  Messages contain only data state transitions (but do not include information  Clients maintain application about valid state transitions) state correctly by navigating  Clients maintain state by guessing hyperlinks the state machine of the service  Techniques for adding session to  Techniques for adding session to HTTP: SOAP:  Session Headers  Cookies (HTTP Headers) (non standard)  URI Re-writing  WS-Resource Framework  Hidden Form Fields (HTTP on top of SOAP on top of HTTP) (*) Each client request to the server must contain all information needed to understand the request, without referring to any stored context on the server. Of course the server stores the state of its resources, shared by all clients. ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 62

63. What about composition?  The basic REST design  WS-BPEL is the standard elements do not take Web service composition language. Business process composition into account models are used to specify how a collection of services HTTP is orchestrated into a composite service User Agent Origin Server  Can we apply WS-BPEL to RESTful services? HTTP Origin Server User Agent ? Origin Server ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 63

64. REST Scalability Cache Proxy/Gateway Origin Client Clients Server  One example of REST middleware is to help with the scalability of a server, which may need to service a very large number of clients ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 64

65. REST Scalability Cache Proxy/Gateway Origin Server Clients  One example of REST middleware is to help with the scalability of a server, which may need to service a very large number of clients ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 65

67. REST Composition Client Composite Origin RESTful Servers service  The “proxy” intermediate element which aggregates the resources provided by multiple servers plays the role of a composite RESTful service  Can/Should we implement it with BPM? ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 67

72. Composite Representation Composite Representation Origin Server Client Origin Servers  A composite representation is interpreted by the client that follows its hyperlinks and aggregates the state of the referenced component resources ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 72

73. Bringing it all together Composite Representation Composite Origin RESTful Servers service Client Origin Servers  A composite representation can be produced by a composite service too ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 73

79. Doodle Map Architecture Web Browser Workflow RESTful Engine Web Services RESTful API APIs GET POST GET Watch it on http://www.jopera.org/docs/videos/doodlemap ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 79

88. Is your composition reusable?  UI vs. API Composition Composite API Representation Composite Origin RESTful Servers UI service  Reusable Client Origin services vs. Servers Reusable Widgets ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 88

90. Single-Origin Sandbox  Security Policies on the client may not always allow it to aggregate data from multiple different sources Composite Representation Composite N Origin RESTful Servers service Client 1 Origin Server  This will change very soon with HTML5 ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 90

92. Towards REST Composition  REST brings a new perspective and new problems to service composition  RESTful services can be composed on the server by defining composite resources and on the client with composite representations  Composing RESTful services helps to put the integration logic of a mashup into a reusable service API and keep it separate from its UI made out of reusable widgets  Business processes can be published on the Web as RESTful Services  RESTful Web service composition is different than mashups, but both can be built using BPM tools like JOpera  GET http://www.jopera.org/ ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 92

94. RPC Call Remote Procedure Call • Procedure/Function Calls are the easiest to program with. • They take a basic programming language construct and make it available across the network (Remote Procedure Call) to connect distributed components • Remote calls are often used within the client/server architectural style, but call-backs are also used in event-oriented styles for notifications ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 94

95. Hot Folder Write Copy File Transfer (Hot Folder) • Transferring files does not require Watch to modify components • A component writes a file, which is Read then copied on a different host, and fed as input into a different component • The transfers can be batched with a certain frequency ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 95

96. Shared Database Create Read Shared Database Update • Sharing a common database does not require to modify components, if they all can support the same schema Delete • Components can communicate by creating, updating and reading entries in the database, which can safely handles the concurrency ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 96

97. Bus Publish Subscribe Message Bus • A message bus connects a variable number of components, which are decoupled from one another. • Components act as message sources by publishing messages into the bus; Components act as message sinks by subscribing to message types (or properties based on the actual content) • The bus can route, queue, buffer, transform and deliver messages to one or more recipients • The “enterprise” service bus is used to implement the SOA style 4.3.2010 ©2010 - Cesare Pautasso 97

99. Web (RESTful Web services) Get Put Delete Post Web • The Web is the connector used in the REST (Representational State Transfer) architectural style • Components may reliably transfer state among themselves using the GET, PUT, DELETE primitives. POST is used for unsafe interactions. Spring Semester 2010 Software Architecture and Design 99

100. Comparison Conclusion  You should focus on whatever solution gets the job done and try to avoid being religious about any specific architectures or technologies.  WS-* has strengths and weaknesses and will be highly suitable to some applications and positively terrible for others.  Likewise with REST.  The decision of which to use depends entirely on the application requirements and constraints.  We hope this comparison will help you make the right choice. ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 100

101. References  Roy Fielding, Architectural Styles and the Design of Network-based Software Architectures, PhD Thesis, University of California, Irvine, 2000  Leonard Richardson, Sam Ruby, RESTful Web Services, O’Reilly, May 2007  Jim Webber, Savas Parastatidis, Ian Robinson, REST in Practice: Hypermedia and Systems Architecture, O‘Reilly, 2010  Subbu Allamaraju, RESTful Web Services Cookbook: Solutions for Improving Scalability and Simplicity, O’Reilly, 2010  Stevan Tilkov, HTTP und REST, dpunkt Verlag, 2009, http://rest-http.info/ ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 101

102. Web References  Martin Fowler, Richardson Maturity Model: steps toward the glory of REST, http://martinfowler.com/articles/richardsonMaturityModel.html  My Constantly Updated Feed or REST-related material: http://delicious.com/cesare.pautasso/rest  This week in REST http://thisweekinrest.wordpress.com/ ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 102

103. Self-References  Cesare Pautasso, Olaf Zimmermann, Frank Leymann, RESTful Web Services vs. Big Web Services: Making the Right Architectural Decision, Proc. of the 17th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2008), Bejing, China, April 2008.  Cesare Pautasso and Erik Wilde. Why is the Web Loosely Coupled? A Multi- Faceted Metric for Service Design, Proc of the 18th International World Wide Web Conference (WWW2009), Madrid, Spain, April 2009.  Cesare Pautasso, BPEL for REST, Proc. of the 6th International Conference on Business Process Management (BPM 2008), Milan, Italy, September 2008.  Cesare Pautasso, RESTful Web Service Composition with JOpera, Proc. Of the International Conference on Software Composition (SC 2009), Zurich, Switzerland, July 2009.  Cesare Pautasso, Gustavo Alonso: From Web Service Composition to Megaprogramming In: Proceedings of the 5th VLDB Workshop on Technologies for E-Services (TES-04), Toronto, Canada, August 2004  Thomas Erl, Raj Balasubramanians, Cesare Pautasso, Benjamin Carlyle, SOA with REST, Prentice Hall, end of 2010 ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 103

104. Leonard Richardson, Thomas Erl, Raj Balasubramanians, Sam Ruby, Cesare Pautasso, Benjamin Carlyle, RESTful Web Services, SOA with REST, O’Reilly, May 2007 Prentice Hall, end of 2010 ©2009-2010 - Cesare Pautasso - 30.6.2010 104