Skip to content

Clarify resolving implicit connections (3.1.1 - ALTERNATIVE to #3823) #3855

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed
Changes from all commits
Commits
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
36 changes: 35 additions & 1 deletion versions/3.1.1.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -185,12 +185,46 @@ It is the responsibility of an embedding format to define how to parse embedded

When parsing an OAD, JSON or YAML objects are parsed into specific Objects (such as [Operation Objects](#operationObject), [Response Objects](#responseObject), [Reference Objects](#referenceObject), etc.) based on the parsing context. Depending on how references are arranged, a given JSON or YAML object can be parsed in multiple different contexts:

* As a full OpenAPI Description document (an [OpenAPI Object](#oasObject) taking up an entire document)
* As a complete OpenAPI Description document
* As the Object type implied by its parent Object within the document
* As a reference target, with the Object type matching the reference source's context

If the same JSON/YAML object is parsed multiple times and the respective contexts require it to be parsed as _different_ Object types, the resulting behavior is _implementation defined_, and MAY be treated as an error if detected. An example would be referencing an empty Schema Object under `#/components/schemas` where a Path Item Object is expected, as an empty object is valid for both types. For maximum interoperability, it is RECOMMENDED that OpenAPI Description authors avoid such scenarios.

#### <a name="resolvingImplicitConnections"></a>Resolving Implicit Connections

Several features of this specification require resolving a non-URI-based connection to some other part of the OpenAPI Description (OAD).

These connections are easily resolved in single-document OADs, but the resolution process in multi-document OADs has never been spelled out, and is therefore _implementation-defined_, within the constraints described in this section.
In some cases, an unambiguous URI-based alternative is available, and OAD authors are RECOMMENDED to always use the alternative:

Source | Target | Alternative
------ | ------ | -----------
[Security Requirement Object](#securityRequirementObject) `{name}` | [Security Scheme Object](#securitySchemeObject) name under the [Components Object](#componentsObject) | _n/a_
[Discriminator Object](#discriminatorObject) `mapping` _(implicit, or explicit name syntax)_ | [Schema Object](#schemaObject) name under the Components Object | `mapping` _(explicit URI syntax)_
[Operation Object](#operationObject) `tags` | [Tag Object](#tagObject) `name` (in the Components Object) | _n/a_
[Link Object](#linkObject) `operationId` | [Path Item Object](#pathItemObject) `operationId` | `operationRef`

A fifth implicit connection, which involves appending the templated URL paths of the [Paths Object](#pathsObject) to the appropriate [Server Object](#serverObject)'s `url` field, is unambiguous because only the entry document's Paths Object contributes URLs to the described API.

It is RECOMMENDED to consider all Operation Objects from all parsed documents when resolving any Link Object `operationId`.
This requires ensuring that all referenced documents have been parsed prior to determining an `operationId` to be unresolvable.

The implicit connections in the Security Requirement Object and Discriminator Object rely on the _component name_, which is the property name holding the component in the appropriate typed sub-object of the Components Object.
For example, the component name of the Schema Object at `#/components/schemas/Foo` is `Foo`.
The implicit connection of tags in the Operation Object use the `name` field of Tag Objects, which (like the Components Object) are found under the root OpenAPI Object.
This means that resolving component names and tag names both depend on starting from the correct OpenAPI Object.

For resolving component and tag name connections from a referenced (non-entry) document, it is RECOMMENDED that tools resolve from the entry document, rather than the current document.
This allows Security Scheme Objects and Tag Objects to be defined with the API's deployment information (the top-level Server Objects), and treated as an interface for referenced documents to access.

The interface approach can also work for Discriminator Objects and Schema Objects, but it is also possible to keep the Discriminator Object's behavior within a single document using the relative URI-reference syntax of `mapping`.

There are not currently URI-based alternatives for the Security Requirement Object or for the Operation Object's `tags` field.
These limitations are expected to be addressed in a future release.

Note that no aspect of implicit connection resolution changes how [URIs are resolved](#relativeReferencesURI), or restricts their possible targets.

### <a name="dataTypes"></a>Data Types

Data types in the OAS are based on the types supported by the [JSON Schema Specification Draft 2020-12](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-00#section-4.2.1).
Expand Down