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

OneTimeKeys is not defined by the CS API spec #1287

Open
DMRobertson opened this issue Oct 13, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

OneTimeKeys is not defined by the CS API spec #1287

DMRobertson opened this issue Oct 13, 2022 · 4 comments
Labels
A-Client-Server Issues affecting the CS API clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit

Comments

@DMRobertson
Copy link
Contributor

Link to problem area: https://spec.matrix.org/unstable/client-server-api/#post_matrixclientv3keysupload

Issue
fallback_keys and one_time_keys are defined as OneTimeKeys. This type is not defined in the client-server spec.

There are no mandatory keys for OneTimeKeys. I expect this confuses our go template langauge machinery.

---
title: OneTimeKeys
type: object
description: |-
One-time public keys. The names of the properties should be in the format
`<algorithm>:<key_id>`. The format of the key is determined
by the [key algorithm](/client-server-api/#key-algorithms).
additionalProperties:
oneOf:
- type: string
- type: object
properties:
key:
type: string
description: The key, encoded using unpadded base64.
signatures:
type: object
description: |-
Signature for the device. Mapped from user ID to signature object,
containing mapping from _key signing identifier_ to the signature
(see also: https://spec.matrix.org/v1.2/appendices/#signing-json)
additionalProperties:
type: object
required: ['key', 'signatures']

@DMRobertson DMRobertson added the aesthetic A suggestion or issue relating to the representation of the spec label Oct 13, 2022
@DMRobertson
Copy link
Contributor Author

Possibly related: #1162

@DMRobertson
Copy link
Contributor Author

#1127 suggests that this can't be done unless we upgrade to OpenAPI v3.

@turt2live turt2live added spec-problem A-Client-Server Issues affecting the CS API and removed aesthetic A suggestion or issue relating to the representation of the spec labels Oct 13, 2022
@KitsuneRal
Copy link
Member

KitsuneRal commented Oct 14, 2022

Exactly; that's the only reason it's not defined. Actually, I even left the definition in its own file, it's just not ref'ed from the API definition.

@richvdh richvdh added the clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit label Feb 28, 2024
@richvdh
Copy link
Member

richvdh commented Feb 28, 2024

We now have OpenAPI v3, and this could be looked at again

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
A-Client-Server Issues affecting the CS API clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants