Arazzo-Specification
Arazzo-Specification copied to clipboard
OAI
The Arazzo Specification - A Tapestry for Deterministic API Workflows
[4.6.6.1](https://spec.openapis.org/arazzo/latest.html#fixed-fields-4) currently defines parameter `name` as a string. There are scenarios where the query parameters are dynamic (based on previous responses for example). Would be nice to allow a runtime...
We have identified use cases where it would be useful to define constant output values in the output of a step or workflow. At the moment outputs are defined as...
1. **Should ABNF restrict references to outputs for runtime expressions using `$steps`?** * Current Situation: The ABNF allows any name after `$steps.`, enabling references like `$steps.myGreatStep.response.body.foo`. * Intended restriction: To...
Should `name` be at least one character? Example: ABNF defines a `"$steps." name` as a possible runtime expression. Are expressions like `$steps.` valid? Or does there have to be at...
Clarified this in the Slack channel: Under https://spec.openapis.org/arazzo/latest.html#step-object ```Describes a single workflow step which MAY be a call to an API operation (OpenAPI Operation Object or another Workflow Object).``` Seems...
I had this question in the official `open-api` slack community here: https://open-api.slack.com/archives/C022K8VD7AP/p1724764208525069 For a simple ["Criterion" condition ](https://spec.openapis.org/arazzo/latest.html#criterionCondition)can the condition just be a "literal" that matches the provided `context` for...
Following on from discussion in the `open-api` slack community here: https://open-api.slack.com/archives/C022K8VD7AP/p1724762008594319 I had the below issue: > Just trying to understand exactly how to validate a workflowId in a "Success...
Within the [Workflow Object Fixed Fields](https://spec.openapis.org/arazzo/v1.0.0.html#fixed-fields-2), there is a typo in the description of `workflowId`. > REQUIRED. Unique string to represent the workflow. The id MUST be unique amongst all...
Similar to #241, RFC 7231 has been obsoleted by RFC 9110 & 9112. > The requestBody is fully supported in HTTP methods where the HTTP 1.1 specification [[RFC7231](https://spec.openapis.org/arazzo/latest.html#bib-RFC7231)] [Section 4.3.1](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-4.3.1)...
I noticed reference to RFC 7230 which has been obsoleted by RFC 9110. > header - Custom headers that are expected as part of the request. Note that [[RFC7230](https://spec.openapis.org/arazzo/latest.html#bib-RFC7230)] [Page...