On Oct 2, 2007, at 6:02 PM, A. Pagaltzis wrote:
> * Peter Lacey <placey@...> [2007-10-02 19:35]:
> > compliance with HATEOAS (God, I hate that term)
>
> Yeah, me too; which is why a while back I proposed saying
> “hypermedia-driven application state” instead, whose initialism
> is HDAS, and whose long form rolls of the tongue with nicely
> rhythmically if you cut “application” to “app.” People weren’t
> very enthusiastic about the idea, though.
>
> So instead I’ve taken to saying “the hypermedia constraint” or
> sometimes just “hypermedia” over either “HATEOAS” or using the
> full phrase. Eg. in this case it’d be:
>
> Similarly, form-based links that allow compliance with the
> hypermedia constraint require an extra trip.

The word "hypertext" should have been enough, but it actually
means very different things to different people (especially
those within the hypertext research community). I can't just
shorten it to "hyperstate" either, since that would imply
"much more state" (not what we want).

It has some aspects in common with "data reactive" engines, as in

http://www.cs.uoregon.edu/research/paraducks/papers/tr9605.d/

though I wasn't aware of that paper until 10 minutes ago.
Much of the software architecture research on constraints was
influenced by the GUI work on constraint-based layout toolkits.

I would suggest calling it the "hypertext constraint" when in
normal discussion, or the "reactive constraint" when within
slapping distance of a literary hypertext fan.

....Roy