I quite like the way Konstrukt (http://konstrukt.dk) does it although they confuse the issuse by using the term controllers for what I would call routing. Tonic does more traditional routing to resources. See Keith’s post for some useful information: http://semwebdev.keithalexander.co.uk/blog/posts/rest-frameworks-php

But I guess what I’d want to convince me is NOT an argument “See, this is why MVC is all wrong”, but instead a proposed solution: “This is a web framework that we think is more resource-centered and suited for the web, using patterns other than MVC.” If someone is going to try to convince me that the only thing suited for the web is writing everything from scratch (and without using design patterns at that, but just making it up as you go along), they’re going to have a tough time. I’m pretty convinced of the power of good design patterns implemented in a good framework for any significant development. For a whole bunch of reasons.

So, if not MVC, than what pattern? And demonstrate that ‘what’ in a good framework. And maybe I (and other doubters) look at it, and say, gee, you’re right, that’s great. (But I suspect that it will end up being a _variation_ on MVC. Which is why I want to see it demo’d, right? Talk is just talk.) The most convincing arguments in your links were about the need for resource-focus, and to me, MVC isn’t incompatible with that at all, nor is MVC too ‘heavy’ for that, but the ‘C’ and ‘V’ end should probably be constrained/supported to a REST interface more.

But just be sure you consider MVC as represented by it’s _best_ examples too, not just it’s worst. Ie, yes, Struts is a monstrish nightmare (or is that a nightmarish monster), but consider a well-designed MVC framework too. Say, Rails.