Skip to content

adds formats registry considerations #3204

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Jul 25, 2023
Merged

adds formats registry considerations #3204

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
3 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
2ebb0ca
- adds considerations to formats registry
baywet Mar 16, 2023
2f08bdb
Apply suggestions from code review
baywet Mar 21, 2023
b436ce5
Apply suggestions from code review
baywet Mar 23, 2023
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
9 changes: 9 additions & 0 deletions registry/format.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -5,6 +5,15 @@ permalink: /registry/format/index.html

# Formats Registry

## Considerations

The existence of a format in this registry DOES NOT require tools to implement it.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The RFC 2119 way to say this would be something like:

Tools MAY implement formats beyond those defined in the OpenAPI specification as they are defined here, but are not required to do so.

or (less commonly seen)

Implementing formats beyond those defined in the OpenAPI specification as they are defined here is strictly OPTIONAL

I don't care about the exact wording, but we should probably not all-caps non-RFC 2119 terms. OPTIONAL and MAY have the same weight in RFC 2119. The OPTIONAL wording above feels closer to what you wrote.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@webron Please suggest a revision to this.


If tools choose to implement any format present in this registry, they SHOULD implement the format following the provided behavior.

The registry SHOULD NOT contain two entries that have the same meaning, unless all but one have been deprecated.


## Contributing

Please raise a [Pull-Request](https://github.com/OAI/OpenAPI-Specification/pulls) or [Issue](https://github.com/OAI/OpenAPI-Specification/issues) to contribute or discuss a registry value.
Expand Down