> I'm using REST as an interface to a storage > I then add more things that listens to changes to that storage, so the data is sortof the API. I get it, but t

> I'm using REST as an interface to a storage > I then add more things that listens to changes to that storage, so the data is sortof the API. I get it, but that's exactly the issue. Data changes are a lossy way to represent business actions/intents. Why would you represent your service as a storage ? Is your business about data storage ? If not, that's the wrong abstraction. What's the advantage of this ? > You're talking about putting the API layer upfront so you'd have a REBASE verb in the same layer that we have GET/POST or SELECT/INSERT etc. I would definitely _not_ do that. Separation of concerns tells me to not mix the transport layer with other concerns. HTTP is just a transport, business semantics have nothing to do in this layer.