Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Clarify parsing ambiguity of "parameters" in Link Object #3276

Closed
handrews opened this issue May 11, 2023 · 2 comments
Closed

Clarify parsing ambiguity of "parameters" in Link Object #3276

handrews opened this issue May 11, 2023 · 2 comments
Assignees
Labels
clarification requests to clarify, but not change, part of the spec links
Milestone

Comments

@handrews
Copy link
Member

The question came up in today's call about fields that could take either a literal value or a runtime expression. The parameters field in the Link Object allows this. Probably we should clarify that anything that parses as a runtime expression SHOULD (MUST?) be handled that way, and that it's therefore not possible to specify a literal value that looks like a runtime expression (since creating an escaping syntax would require a minor version increment).

cc @webron @mkistler

@handrews
Copy link
Member Author

There's a further ambiguity: the property names under parameters are either parameter names or qualified with the parameter's in field, e.g. path.id vs query.id. Parameter names are strings without any restrictions other than that imposed by their locations, and . is a valid character in at least the path and query parameter names.

In this case, there's an easy solution which is that if you (for some bizarre reason) have a parameter named path.id, then to reference it you would always qualifiy it (path.path.id, or I guess if you're particularly mind-bending ,query.path.id).

@handrews
Copy link
Member Author

handrews commented Jun 6, 2024

PRs merged – closing!

@handrews handrews closed this as completed Jun 6, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
clarification requests to clarify, but not change, part of the spec links
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant