This sort of proves the point though, doesn't it? REST as initially defined has become some kind of hyperlinked / referenced platonic ideal that very few do or even attempt.
Postgrest, returning/modifying predefined resource(s) based on standard HTTP verbs and whatnot, is at least as RESTful as most other things that use the term. Despite the imprecision, this is still a somewhat useful descriptor beyond "oh it's arbitrary RPC". And it's not at all like GraphQL
> This sort of proves the point though, doesn't it?
It definitely proves that postgrest is not rest in any way.
> REST as initially defined has become some kind of hyperlinked / referenced platonic ideal that very few do or even attempt.
Sure? At no point have I been arguing for doing REST. Just for not calling things REST when they obviously are not?
> Postgrest, returning/modifying predefined resource(s) based on standard HTTP verbs and whatnot, is at least as RESTful as most other things that use the term.
While I completely agree that PostgREST's qualifier is entirely as worthless as every other thing calling itself REST, I don't think that's praiseworthy.
> Despite the imprecision
It's not imprecision, it's actively lying. It doesn't do what it says on the tin, and the tin doesn't describe what it actually do.
REST is an actual acronym, not an arbitrary trademark, it stands for words which have meaning.
Postgrest, returning/modifying predefined resource(s) based on standard HTTP verbs and whatnot, is at least as RESTful as most other things that use the term. Despite the imprecision, this is still a somewhat useful descriptor beyond "oh it's arbitrary RPC". And it's not at all like GraphQL