This is really starting to sound like what java / .net were doing with wsdl code generators via soap.<p>Devs that integrate with multiple apis know there is a problem with the wide range of implementations, from authentication to communication patterns. This makes it a pain to integration with multiple service providers. Without some form a standardization you must have an intermediary library to provide an abstraction.<p>Are we doing it right?? The community has recognized the problem of non-standard lightweight services to be widespread enough to create a tool to standardize communication with them.<p>Would something like HAL (<a href="http://stateless.co/hal_specification.html" rel="nofollow">http://stateless.co/hal_specification.html</a>) be a start down a path where we can have lightweight services that are also self documenting?
algorithmmonkey hit the nail on the head: this sounds a HELL of a lot like WSDL and the WS* method in general. I HATE the WS*. However, I'm not going to knock what they are doing, because it is certainly a noble effort. Could someone who is much smarter than me explain how this would avoid the pitfalls of past attempts at abstracting service layers?<p>It's interesting to see the approach of abstractable APIs, vs. the other way of making usage of data more automatic, via machine readable semantic markup and embedding metadata into the data structure aka linked data/semantic web.<p>I think its all awesome.