What I meant is that this is a particular kind of backend API, a very "model-centric" one. Nothing wrong with that, I just don't think this is the one and only kind and thus should take on the generic name.
> 2. If you're transitioning _to_ this kind from some sort of older kind.
Understood. Maybe an approach is to allow for this to specified optionally, with the fallback of being hard-coded if it's not present?
I think that the examples appear to be a 'model-centric' one, because we're trying to reach people that build very model-centric sites as of now, but resources can be anything, so I don't think that it's super specific. This is a good thing to think about though.
> with the fallback of being hard-coded if it's not present?
See above for some other good stuff about the IDs that wycats knew that I wasn't as current on.
What I meant is that this is a particular kind of backend API, a very "model-centric" one. Nothing wrong with that, I just don't think this is the one and only kind and thus should take on the generic name.
> 2. If you're transitioning _to_ this kind from some sort of older kind.
Understood. Maybe an approach is to allow for this to specified optionally, with the fallback of being hard-coded if it's not present?