> I was surprised that you didn't advocate for using traditional server-rendered HTML for views that don't require significant frontend interactivity/client-side state management?
I don't know that there's one best choice for how to render the front end. I generally like Angular because it's strongly opinionated, and in general, strong opinions in software leads to faster velocity and lower TCO. But I don't think that Angular is the universal best choice.
I do however think having the front end powered by a REST API is 100% the right move, because it draws a line in the sand where if private data or incorrect data are getting returned then there is clearly an issue. Having a specific place (the JSON response) where you can write tests against is a huge win, one big enough that imho it outweighs every possible disadvantage of REST.
I don't know that there's one best choice for how to render the front end. I generally like Angular because it's strongly opinionated, and in general, strong opinions in software leads to faster velocity and lower TCO. But I don't think that Angular is the universal best choice. I do however think having the front end powered by a REST API is 100% the right move, because it draws a line in the sand where if private data or incorrect data are getting returned then there is clearly an issue. Having a specific place (the JSON response) where you can write tests against is a huge win, one big enough that imho it outweighs every possible disadvantage of REST.