I am not the authority on what REST is. That would be Roy Fielding, who has explicitly stated that hypermedia is a requirement[1]. So go ahead and tell Mr. Fielding that his definition of REST is incorrect.
I am well aware that REST no longer means what it originally described, which is why I think it should go by another term that is not burdened by being a marketing buzzword.
> So go ahead and tell Mr. Fielding that his definition of REST is incorrect.
Not "incorrect", but I'd be happy to tell him that his term has been co-opted by the programming masses to means something vaguely related to the original meaning but less precise. I suspect Mr. Fielding already knows that.
> I am well aware that REST no longer means what it originally described, which is why I think it should go by another term that is not burdened by being a marketing buzzword.
I agree there. I think changing how the masses use the term is a lost cause. (Consider the incredibly hard-fought battle to reclaim the original definition of "hacker", which after decades did succeed in establishing it as a secondary definition. That's the most successful case I've ever seen.) So I think ryeguy has it right: call Fielding's definition "HATEOAS" "real REST" or "hypermedia REST" or something.
It's far too late for that. REST as you describe it is not commonly known as REST. People refer to it as HATEOAS or "real REST" or "hypermedia REST". Just saying REST without qualification refers to resource-oriented json based apis.
I am well aware that REST no longer means what it originally described, which is why I think it should go by another term that is not burdened by being a marketing buzzword.
[1]: http://roy.gbiv.com/untangled/2008/rest-apis-must-be-hyperte...