Right, let's get started with some basic conventions in the Object Network!

This part in the Object Network series will cover URLs, HTTP headers and some common JSON patterns.

Updated 23/1/12: I changed the URLs in the example to have one of each type.   ...

OK, I'm trying to take a Big Idea and make it as Simple As Possible to grasp.

If we link our JSON data together and use the same formats, then our mobile, browser and server apps can become much simpler - through clean, stable, common, shared, re-used code - and much more powerful - through clean, stable, common, shared, linked, cached data.

This is the second part in the Object Network series, which will guide you away from building isolated Web APIs to engaging in a linked-up data landscape.   ...

It's interesting to compare the current growth of Web APIs with the early growth of the Web itself. To save you jumping those links: the Web dramatically beats the APIs.

I believe that the most likely cause of such relatively slow growth (in what should be a booming ecosystem) is that each API forms a closed silo and cannot benefit from any network effects. Every API is different and there are no links between them. There usually aren't any links within a silo. You can't even use a given API without first consulting the documentation.

The Object Network is designed to fix this, with linked-up JSON in common formats. This will allow easier mashing, sharing and cacheing of data and allow client code to be shared and reused.   ...

Mobile Monday London met last night to discuss the Mobile Web and Widgets. It was an engaging and thought-provoking evening.

Your intrepid reporter was there and, in spite of the crashing of his sad, clunky old Windows Mobile Xperia X1, losing all his notes, he brings you this hot report from right out of his memory (somewhat steamed up by subsequent socialising, but reclarified by Google).

After that, I give an explanation of why I believe that Widgets are not the solution to what Mobile 2.0 needs...   ...

Mobiles are unique - if you want to miss out on the opportunity they represent, you could choose to see them as just slow computers with tiny interfaces and dodgy Internet connections. Then try to squeeze in your traditional applications; try squeezing the office desktop metaphor with its sedentary documents into a device the size of a mouse!

Alternatively, see them as the most personal, social and dynamic of devices that are becoming connected to the Internet. Now a multi-billion-scale global opportunity opens up to you. That's customers and dollars! In trying to grasp this, some are calling it 'Mobile 2.0', by analogy with its sibling, Web 2.0.

In that light, the Killer App for Mobile 2.0 is the sharer, masher and updater of People, Things, Times and Places... The key to getting Mobile 2.0 right is for it to merge seamlessly into our lives. That means the handling of dynamic and shared data becomes the top priority, even above the handling of applications.

This article describes a Mobile 2.0 platform that makes people and their stuff first class - not applications.   ...

Last night's Google London Open Source Jam (also here) was on the subject of the 'Web' (didn't they invent that? Oh no, that was Microsoft).

This event has been getting better and better each time I've attended. There were some very interesting lightning talks held together with a tight structure and plenty of chance to chat, drink cold Leffe and eat cold pizza. And nick [transatlantic translation: 'steal'] the Green & Black's chocolate.

An ideal Micro Conference...   ...

Web 2.0's definition includes seeing the Web as an application platform. Which means it is in competition with Java and .Net, and with SOA, for both local and widely distributed applications.

If the Web is going to be a platform, the skills you need to learn to program it are the core Web 2.0 technologies such as Ajax, JSON, Atom, Microformats and OpenID.

And Ruby. This language, that's capturing the hearts of many Web 2.0 programmers, is ideal for easing the transition from the Java and .Net platforms to the Web platform, as I will show.

Even if you're part of a big company that is generally immune to the latest trends, the marriage of Ruby and the Web-as-platform may be something to prepare for. It could even displace your SOA agenda...   ...

What do all the MAJOR Web 2.0 technologies of 2007 have in common?

Let me list them first:

    M.icroformats (including tags)
    A.jax (including Comet)
    J.SON (plus YAML)
    O.penID (plus SXIP, LID, Yadis)
    R.EST (including Atom, APP)

What these technologies have in common is that they're all lighter than their competitors:

  ...

In an exclusive nine-part dialogue with an imaginary eBay Architect, we present an accessible discussion of the REST vs. SOA issue.

Although eBay have what they call a 'REST' interface, it is, in fact, a STREST interface, and only works for one of the many function calls that they make available via SOAP (GetSearchResults).

In this dialogue series, I argue the case for eBay to adopt a truly REST approach to their integration API.

Part 2: Setting Data   ...

In an exclusive nine-part dialogue with an imaginary eBay Architect, we present an accessible discussion of the REST vs. SOA issue.

Although eBay have what they call a 'REST' interface, it is, in fact, a STREST interface, and only works for one of the many function calls that they make available via SOAP (GetSearchResults).

In this dialogue series, I argue the case for eBay to adopt a truly REST approach to their integration API.

Part 1: Getting Data   ...

Don't write your interactive Web application in custom Javascript! The Web's Declarative nature needn't be broken just because you want two-way dynamic data instead of one-way documents on your site.

Instead, write Declaratively to generic Javascripts, plugins and browser features such as Hijax, hInclude, XForms, SVG, XBL, etc.   ...

Open Data .. has .. recently .. been.. all .. over .. the .. blog .. o .. sphere!

Openness is a classic Us-and-Them issue. Big, nasty Apple/MySpace/Flickr is trying to control what little me/SingleStatus/Zoomr can do with my/our own stuff.

Open Data vs. Closed; Open Source vs. Proprietary; P2P vs. DRM; privacy vs. surveillance. The battles between the freedom of the pioneer, the individual and the minority against the rules and stability of the establishment and the majority form the endless shape of human history.

Us beating Them is Hollywood's favourite subject on-screen - and ironically Them fighting Us Hollywood's favourite battle off-screen.

As an Us-and-Them issue, with Us less powerful than Them, it's also tempting to give up and to follow the crowd - to do what we're told, to not ask for or sieze the privacy and open data we feel entitled to.

However, at XTech 2006 recently, there was a set of talks on the subject with a more positive approach.   ...

It gives me great pleasure to announce the 2006 'What Now How' Awards for REST Protocols (or 'APIs') in the Read/Write Category.

All this year's awardees share the distinction of being truly worthy of the 'REST' label; these Read/Write Protocols are acknowledged here for their uncompromising adherence to the simple principles of the World Wide Web.   ...

Microformats are subversive: they not only challenge the approach of full-blown Semantic Web approaches, but even question fundamental Web 2.0 building blocks such as Web Feeds and Web APIs.

I recently attended XTech 2006, where there were a few talks related to Microformats.

After summarising these talks, I'll finish with my shocking revelations about the subversive nature of Microformats!   ...

The vast majority of supposedly 'REST' Web APIs are simply abusing HTTP to carry function calls. I call these APIs 'Service-Trampled REST', or STREST.

STREST APIs come with specific costs which could stifle the two-way data Web (Web2.0) if allowed to propagate unchecked. Although 'mashability' is a supposed benefit of the current proliferation of APIs, true interoperability and scalability can only be guaranteed by true REST interaction.

This is not an academic, purist or aesthetic stance, but one based on practical consequences, as I will explain.   ...

Distributing an application over a network isn't just a case of splitting it down a natural line and putting a network in-between. What works in-process simply doesn't work so well across the wire.

And just calling such an Internet version of application and process interfaces 'Web' Services doesn't mean it has anything at all to do with the Web, or that it in any way shares the Web's scalability, flexibility and robustness.

Indeed, I claim that you cannot distribute without also 'inverting'; you have to face what I call the 'Imperative-to-Declarative Inversion', if you really want a successful, scalable, distributed application.

Declarative Architectures such as REST (i.e. the Web, and now 'Web 2.0') dominate the broader Internet.   ...

Declarative Architectures focus on the What, not the How, of programming. The How has dominated the field - perhaps 80% of programming is done in the traditional Imperative style, where we tell the computer How to do a task in explicit steps.

I'd like to show in this blog how Declarative Architectures and technologies are not just an interesting sideshow to the main Imperative attraction, but a complete and powerful programming alternative in their own right - indeed, one which has already dominated certain fields.

Imagine being able to simply express What we want the computer to do - to give it constraints and rules - then let it work out for itself How to achieve our goals.

I believe that saying What, not How, will become the dominant paradigm in programming.   ...