When integrating external identity or account verification services, it is tempting to mirror the provider's API structure directly into your domain models. However, mapping your business logic to a third-party's naming convention creates "leaky abstractions." If the provider renames their service types or adds new tiers, your entire codebase may require a refactor.
This article explores how to define a clean, local taxonomy for WhatsApp account classification to keep your business logic decoupled from provider-specific terminology.
The Risk of Leaky Abstractions
Most identification services use specific service types—such as those identifying basic registration, avatar availability, or business account status—to determine the depth of the inquiry. If your application code is littered with string literals or constants that match the provider's internal API keys, you face two primary risks:
- Rigidity: Changing the scope of your checks requires hunting down and updating every instance of the provider's service string.
- Cognitive Load: New developers must learn the provider's specific taxonomy before they can understand your business rules.
Defining Your Local Taxonomy
Instead of exposing the provider's internal naming scheme, create an internal domain model that reflects what you are trying to achieve, rather than how the provider classifies the request.
Terms to Own Locally
Define your own internal enum or constant set that maps to your business requirements. For example:
-
VERIFY_REGISTRATION: Focuses on whether an identifier exists on the platform. -
ENRICH_PROFILE: Focuses on retrieving additional metadata, such as visual identifiers. -
CLASSIFY_BUSINESS: Focuses on distinguishing between personal and commercial account types.
Terms to Keep Provider-Specific
Keep the provider's API-specific strings (like their internal service identifiers) strictly within an Adapter Layer. This layer acts as a translator, mapping your local domain terms to the provider's required request format.
Implementation Strategy: The Adapter Pattern
By utilizing an adapter, you ensure that your core business logic interacts only with your local taxonomy. When you need to change providers or update your check depth, you only modify the mapping logic within the adapter.
Conceptual Mapping Example
// Local domain taxonomy
enum AccountCheckScope {
Basic,
Profile,
BusinessType
}
// The Adapter Layer handles the translation
class WhatsAppAdapter {
mapScopeToProviderType(scope: AccountCheckScope): string {
switch (scope) {
case AccountCheckScope.Basic: return "ws";
case AccountCheckScope.Profile: return "ws_avatar";
case AccountCheckScope.BusinessType: return "ws_business";
default: throw new Error("Unknown scope");
}
}
}
Review Checklist for Your Integration
Before finalizing your integration, ensure your architecture adheres to these principles:
- [ ] Decoupling: Does your core business service know about the provider's service strings, or does it only know about your local
AccountCheckScope? - [ ] Normalization: Are the results from the provider normalized into a local data structure before they reach your database or UI layer?
- [ ] Isolation: Is the logic that handles request formatting and response parsing contained within a single module or class?
Conclusion
By treating the provider's API as an implementation detail rather than a core dependency, you build a more maintainable and resilient system. A clean local taxonomy ensures that your application remains focused on its business goals, regardless of how the underlying service providers evolve their internal schemas. For more information on best practices for identity verification, visit WA Lookup.
This article was drafted with AI assistance and reviewed before publishing.
