I don&#x27;t see anything non-RESTy about your former example (and would argue it&#x27;s a BETTER protocol design).<p>Imagine we want to change the state of light 7 (and only light 7).<p>A PUT&#x2F;PATCH of &quot;ON&quot; &quot;OFF&quot; (or 1 or 0 or a float for a dimmer) to <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;raspberry1.local&#x2F;lights&#x2F;7" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;raspberry1.local&#x2F;lights&#x2F;7</a> to change the status of light 7 is better IMO than doing a GET to <a href="http:&#x2F;&#x2F;raspberry1.local&#x2F;lights" rel="nofollow">http:&#x2F;&#x2F;raspberry1.local&#x2F;lights</a> and then a PUTS&#x2F;PATCH to that same URL to update all lights status for the purpose of just updating one light. The latter is obviously fragile in the face of multiple writers (you&#x27;ll lose updates on overlapping but not colliding writes-an update to light 6 that overlaps in time with light 7 can result in the earlier of those updates being lost when there&#x27;s no inherent reason for it).