Open APIs

We are in the process of implementing the party/individual API and have some questions.

In respect to the "Disability" array: In the 'Individual' UML Model on page 14, it shows a "0,,*" relationship to Disability, however the "Further document any rules that must be implemented when patching attributes" table on page 55 states that 'disability is mandatory'.

I would expect disability, and the majority of the other fields listed in the table to be optional, even in a patching scenario, so what is the table trying to represent?

------------------------------
Ken Mazzini
Telstra Corporation
------------------------------

Hi Ken
My understanding of the patch rule here is that if you supplied a Disability element (capital D) in the input resource, then the disability attribute (small d, datatype String) is mandatory within that element. Compare with the next rule, if you supplied a Characteristic element, then the name and value are both mandatory within the element.
It is confusing, perhaps, due the unfortunate choice of the same name for the element (data type) and the attribute.
Hope it helps

------------------------------
Jonathan Goldberg
Amdocs Management Limited
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 26, 2018 02:21
From: Ken Mazzini
Subject: TMF632_Party_Management (14.5.1) - Individual

We are in the process of implementing the party/individual API and have some questions.

In respect to the "Disability" array: In the 'Individual' UML Model on page 14, it shows a "0,,*" relationship to Disability, however the "Further document any rules that must be implemented when patching attributes" table on page 55 states that 'disability is mandatory'.

I would expect disability, and the majority of the other fields listed in the table to be optional, even in a patching scenario, so what is the table trying to represent?

------------------------------
Ken Mazzini
Telstra Corporation
------------------------------

Thanks @Jonathan Goldberg​, are we able to add an additional sentence to the document to make that clear?

------------------------------
Ken Mazzini
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 26, 2018 03:24
From: Jonathan Goldberg
Subject: TMF632_Party_Management (14.5.1) - Individual

Hi Ken
My understanding of the patch rule here is that if you supplied a Disability element (capital D) in the input resource, then the disability attribute (small d, datatype String) is mandatory within that element. Compare with the next rule, if you supplied a Characteristic element, then the name and value are both mandatory within the element.
It is confusing, perhaps, due the unfortunate choice of the same name for the element (data type) and the attribute.
Hope it helps

------------------------------
Jonathan Goldberg
Amdocs Management Limited

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 26, 2018 02:21
From: Ken Mazzini
Subject: TMF632_Party_Management (14.5.1) - Individual

We are in the process of implementing the party/individual API and have some questions.

In respect to the "Disability" array: In the 'Individual' UML Model on page 14, it shows a "0,,*" relationship to Disability, however the "Further document any rules that must be implemented when patching attributes" table on page 55 states that 'disability is mandatory'.

I would expect disability, and the majority of the other fields listed in the table to be optional, even in a patching scenario, so what is the table trying to represent?

------------------------------
Ken Mazzini
Telstra Corporation
------------------------------

I don't know what the plans are for updating this API in the upcoming release (18.5). Also we may need to look more generally at this patch documentation since the same issue might exist in other API specs. Adding @Sophie BOULEAU and @Mariano Belaunde to this conversation.

------------------------------
Jonathan Goldberg
Amdocs Management Limited
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 26, 2018 21:28
From: Ken Mazzini
Subject: TMF632_Party_Management (14.5.1) - Individual

Thanks @Jonathan Goldberg​, are we able to add an additional sentence to the document to make that clear?

------------------------------
Ken Mazzini

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 26, 2018 03:24
From: Jonathan Goldberg
Subject: TMF632_Party_Management (14.5.1) - Individual

Hi Ken
My understanding of the patch rule here is that if you supplied a Disability element (capital D) in the input resource, then the disability attribute (small d, datatype String) is mandatory within that element. Compare with the next rule, if you supplied a Characteristic element, then the name and value are both mandatory within the element.
It is confusing, perhaps, due the unfortunate choice of the same name for the element (data type) and the attribute.
Hope it helps

------------------------------
Jonathan Goldberg
Amdocs Management Limited

Original Message:
Sent: Jul 26, 2018 02:21
From: Ken Mazzini
Subject: TMF632_Party_Management (14.5.1) - Individual

We are in the process of implementing the party/individual API and have some questions.

In respect to the "Disability" array: In the 'Individual' UML Model on page 14, it shows a "0,,*" relationship to Disability, however the "Further document any rules that must be implemented when patching attributes" table on page 55 states that 'disability is mandatory'.

I would expect disability, and the majority of the other fields listed in the table to be optional, even in a patching scenario, so what is the table trying to represent?

------------------------------
Ken Mazzini
Telstra Corporation
------------------------------