"REST (as in Representational State Transfer), happens to be defined
by my dissertation. I am getting tired of big companies making idiotic
claims about REST and their so-called RESTful architectures. The only
similarity between CMIS and REST is that they both have four-letter
REST is an architectural style, not a protocol, and thus announcing it
as a protocol binding is absurdly ignorant behavior for a group of
technology companies. The RESTish protocol binding actually being
proposed by CMIS is AtomPub, or at least it would be if not for the
huge number of unnecessary protocol extensions that tunnel the Web
Services interface through fake-Atom and fake-HTTP... Are there any
REST constraints that this binding doesn't violate?...
It is obvious that the SOAP binding was designed first and the AtomPub
binding added for marketing reasons."