DEV Community

loading...

Discussion on: Good Bye Web APIs

Collapse
leob profile image
leob • Edited

Hold on, I've read your post, but more importantly I've modified and expanded my original comment - read it again :-)

The problem (as I try to explain) is not that your framework isn't good, I think it's very interesting. The problem is that your message comes across as negative, as unfairly trashing REST and GraphQL. I think that hurts your goal of getting people interesting in your solution.

I've looked at your docs and the fact that you don't have an explicit API layer but "direct object execution" is only a part of the whole thing, all of the features built around and on top of it are probably much more interesting.

People aren't interested in you telling them that they've been doing it wrong, they're interested to hear what value you can add - and looking at your docs, adding value is what you're able to do.

I'd say dump the polarizing title "Goodbye Web APIs" and the divisive message "Web APIs suck". Well as clickbait to get people to read your post the title does work, but if you'd change it to "Web APIs? Maybe there's a better way" then people might be more inclined to take you seriously.

Thread Thread
mvila profile image
Manuel Vila Author

Thanks, @leob , for explaining why you rejected my post in the first place. I agree that the title is a bit "click-baity". But I don't regret it. It's sad, but it's the only thing that works today.

Thread Thread
rob117 profile image
Rob Sherling • Edited

I understand what you're saying, and you do you, but I don't think I'd use a budding technology solution with someone who openly has this negative mentality at the helm.

"It's the only thing that works today."
"You should read the post more carefully."

These are not good responses to carefully crafted, constructive criticism. If you look at the likes for @leob 's comments vs. the likes for yours, I think it's pretty apparent that this isn't the best approach for you to take.

Thread Thread
leob profile image
leob

Well you're absolutely right that your click-baity title worked, because your post attracted a lot of views and comments. But at the same time I think it's off-putting to many people, which is a shame because I think the work you've done is very interesting. Anyway just my 2 cents, no worries :-)

Thread Thread
leob profile image
leob • Edited

Couldn't have said it better Rob Sherling, this is exactly the point - the project might be fantastic but someone with a negative or defensive attitude at the helm is going to put people off ... really what I'd sincerely advise is, flip the switch, lose the negativity, and the project might be doing well and might attract enthusiastic users and collaborators!

Thread Thread
mvila profile image
Manuel Vila Author

Thanks, @leob , I got your point. I wish I could use a less provocative tone, but I feel this is a necessary evil to get this project off the ground. This is not the first I write about Layr (see my previous posts). I used a more consensual tone then, and it didn't work at all.

Thread Thread
leob profile image
leob

Well you're right about that and you absolutely do get attention this way - you see that people start discussing, no doubt about it. So well yes, maybe sometimes this is the only way ... but, now that you do have the attention, maybe you should consider trying to change the tone of the discussion - make it less provocative :-)

Thread Thread
mvila profile image
Manuel Vila Author

OK. I'll do my best! :)

Thread Thread
leob profile image
leob

Haha good, you rock, you're a star!

Thread Thread
emmymay profile image
EmmyMay

The title can be click-baity but the content doesn't have to be.

Thread Thread
leob profile image
leob

True and that's the case, to a degree :-)