The latest articles on DEV Community by Dmytro Popov (@dmytro_popov_5489ccb6623e). https://dev.to/dmytro_popov_5489ccb6623e https://media2.dev.to/dynamic/image/width=90,height=90,fit=cover,gravity=auto,format=auto/https:%2F%2Fdev-to-uploads.s3.us-east-2.amazonaws.com%2Fuploads%2Fuser%2Fprofile_image%2F3521992%2Fe43e46e0-b0d4-4da4-abfc-daf3222eab66.jpg https://dev.to/dmytro_popov_5489ccb6623e en Dmytro Popov Mon, 22 Sep 2025 12:40:29 +0000 https://dev.to/dmytro_popov_5489ccb6623e/can-executable-business-logic-be-designed-in-a-service-instead-of-an-entity-in-ddd-38hl https://dev.to/dmytro_popov_5489ccb6623e/can-executable-business-logic-be-designed-in-a-service-instead-of-an-entity-in-ddd-38hl <p>According to Eric Evans’ book "Domain-Driven Design", it seems to me that the key concepts of DDD are Ubiquitous Language, Bounded Context, and the defined Isolation between these bounded contexts.<br> Additionally, the key design elements provided are: Entity, ValueObject, and Service.</p> <p>My question is:<br> In your opinion, is it acceptable to design business logic inside a <strong>Service</strong> instead of an Entity?<br> As a result, the Entity becomes <strong>anemic</strong>, BUT <strong>it continues to be part of the product aspect</strong> (as well as part of the context and the ubiquitous language) and still maintains its identity.</p> <p>So, in this case, it seems that the main concept of DDD is preserved, despite the described "compromise".</p> ddd architecture