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

Spec text incorrectly renders query parameters of type object #1993

Open
richvdh opened this issue Nov 12, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

Spec text incorrectly renders query parameters of type object #1993

richvdh opened this issue Nov 12, 2024 · 0 comments
Labels
clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit

Comments

@richvdh
Copy link
Member

richvdh commented Nov 12, 2024

Link to problem area:

https://spec.matrix.org/v1.12/client-server-api/#get_matrixclientv3thirdpartyuserprotocol, https://spec.matrix.org/v1.12/application-service-api/#get_matrixappv1thirdpartyuserprotocol, and others.

Issue

Certain APIs are specified by the OpenAPI definitions as taking query parameters of type object. You might wonder how an object can be passed as a query parameter. The relevant part of the OpenAPI spec is the definition of the Parameter Object; in particular the rules for serialization of the parameter. The relevant OpenAPI fields are style (which is specified to default to form for query parameters) and explode (which defaults to true when style is form). The style examples table then gives an example serialization of R=100&G=200&B=150 for an object containing keys R, G and B.

The spec text doesn't make that at all clear. The parameter table is just plain misleading.

@richvdh richvdh added the clarification An area where the expected behaviour is understood, but the spec could do with being more explicit label Nov 12, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
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

1 participant