OAI / OpenAPI-Specification

The OpenAPI Specification Repository
https://openapis.org
Apache License 2.0
28.91k stars 9.07k forks source link

Beyond 3.1: The New Big List of Possibilities #2572

Closed earth2marsh closed 4 months ago

earth2marsh commented 3 years ago

With 3.1 released, it's time to revisit the backlog of possible stories to consider as the specification continues to evolve. In cases where a specific TSC or TDC member has indicated interest, their name will be listed in [brackets].

Descriptiveness:

Issues covered by SIGS

Authoring improvements:

Out of scope for X.X, but important to track for the future:

darrelmiller commented 3 years ago

Proposal to start separate working groups to drive special interest areas:

Overlays Working Group - Ron Security Working Group - Initially MikeR Scenario Descriptions - Phil

Basic process (suggested):

balazstbb commented 2 years ago

Would be nice to finally get a solution for https://github.com/OAI/OpenAPI-Specification/issues/182 that is a long outstanding problem with many people requesting it. I know that would come with model change it may break the compatibility with all generators, but later you get there more work will be done. And people can keep using older versions and generators until this supports it.

peteraritchie commented 2 years ago

Is "Reusable groups" specifically for parameters or more general (e.g. for all components)

RCBiczok commented 2 years ago

I would also recommend having a look at OAI/OpenAPI-Specification#630 - like every ISO 20022-based service depends on it.

rafalkrupinski commented 2 years ago

Explicit property requirement/nullability for read and write. Something like

properties:
  prop:
    schema: <schema or ref>
    read:
      require: boolean | 'forbid'
      nullable: boolean
    write: ...
rafalkrupinski commented 2 years ago

Currently we have read- and writeOnly properties to handle cases of slightly different types for incoming and outgoing data. But the PATCH operation is special as it typically allows any property to be omitted and others to be null. The current solution to this is to define a whole new type that has all the properties marked as such. Therefore I think it would be useful to have some means to modify a type in such a way to make it easily work with PATCH method.

handrews commented 4 months ago

I'm going to close this as outdated- the "big list of possibilities" has long since moved to the Moonwalk discussions, and our approach to a possible 3.2+ is very different and more focused (see #3529)