Sergio Moya

FYI, https://github.com/asyncapi/spec/pull/809 adds support for Tags at Server Object level.

I like the idea of having a standard object with all this info. Except for the ID. I'm going to drop why I think `id` should be considered as part...

> @smoya `id` is removed -> #796 no worries :) Then please update the description of this issue which still mentions it.

> I love the move to a property, whether `address` is the right keyword, not so sure, but I don't have other alternatives at the moment. > > What exactly...

The following PR's have been created: - https://github.com/asyncapi/spec/pull/719 - https://github.com/asyncapi/spec-json-schemas/pull/171 - Pending Parser-JS work.

> And I want to thank you for giving me the opportunity to voice my opinions here (through two different personas - definitions author and tooling author) and sorry for...

> Referring to the change itself: I wonder if when we have an `address` inside a `Channel Item Object`, shouldn't the `.channels` shape of the object be changed to a...

I agree @char0n on this. Also I want to emphasize the fact that channels need a identifier. This is key, and one of the reasons behind this change. Read my...

> Of course, referencing can be a problem if we want to treat operations and channels in a registry fashion. Then we have to remember about those keys in the...

> IDEs will still recognize them, letting us better navigate documents with no additional effort required (all IDEs already have some kind of support for JSON Schema and $ref). Do...