Open APIs

I was trying to implement  PaymentMethod related operations but noticed in the JSON file the type of some entities does not respect the same structure as other APIs the issues are listed below:
1. Some types have a 'Type' suffix which is not usually there in other APIs: RelatedPartyRefType, TimePeriodType etc.
2. @ type attribute is usually specifying the type of the entity provided but here it is an enum specifying the type of the payment not the type of the entity providing payment data

Would you please provide some clarifications on the 2 points above? Are we ok moving forward with the implementation or if you would have updates on them could you please let us know when will this happen?

Many thanks,
Calin

------------------------------
Calin Mates
IBM Corporation
------------------------------

Hi Calin
(I inadvertently replied to you privately, now posting publicly)
Thanks for your comments.
As part of a schema alignment effort, we are trying to process all the APIs and fix inconsistencies such as the items you pointed out. In R18.5 this has been done for eight APIs in the Service domain.
I have brought your comments to the attention of the leader of the Payment Management API.

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

Original Message:
Sent: Mar 18, 2019 05:30
From: Calin Mates
Subject: TMF670 - Payment Methods API 17.5.0

I was trying to implement  PaymentMethod related operations but noticed in the JSON file the type of some entities does not respect the same structure as other APIs the issues are listed below:
1. Some types have a 'Type' suffix which is not usually there in other APIs: RelatedPartyRefType, TimePeriodType etc.
2. @ type attribute is usually specifying the type of the entity provided but here it is an enum specifying the type of the payment not the type of the entity providing payment data

Would you please provide some clarifications on the 2 points above? Are we ok moving forward with the implementation or if you would have updates on them could you please let us know when will this happen?

Many thanks,
Calin

------------------------------
Calin Mates
IBM Corporation
------------------------------

Please ignore this - I posted a new question since it seems to be a new thread
-------------------------
Hi John, 

I'm designing the services post and patch within PaymentMethod_API for Mobile and came across the issues Calin mentioned in the past. 
So, when reading the spec, I understood that all the Enum-Variables are also objects of payment that are inheritance of the payment method.
to be able to update (partially) and create a payment method. (bank etc), it also means that a multiple inheritance of payment object types ( need to be build for PaymentMethod_Update and PaymentMethod_Create, correct? see screenshot

Secondly, when designing  the patch, there is no parameter like @baseType, @schemaLocation, and/or at least @type within the object PaymentMethod_Update (for the request body). I assume this has been forgotten? 

Regards,
Erlina

------------------------------
Erlina Hennies
Deutsche Telekom AG
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Mar 19, 2019 16:37
From: Jonathan Goldberg
Subject: TMF670 - Payment Methods API 17.5.0

Hi Calin
(I inadvertently replied to you privately, now posting publicly)
Thanks for your comments.
As part of a schema alignment effort, we are trying to process all the APIs and fix inconsistencies such as the items you pointed out. In R18.5 this has been done for eight APIs in the Service domain.
I have brought your comments to the attention of the leader of the Payment Management API.

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

Original Message:
Sent: Mar 18, 2019 05:30
From: Calin Mates
Subject: TMF670 - Payment Methods API 17.5.0

I was trying to implement  PaymentMethod related operations but noticed in the JSON file the type of some entities does not respect the same structure as other APIs the issues are listed below:
1. Some types have a 'Type' suffix which is not usually there in other APIs: RelatedPartyRefType, TimePeriodType etc.
2. @ type attribute is usually specifying the type of the entity provided but here it is an enum specifying the type of the payment not the type of the entity providing payment data

Would you please provide some clarifications on the 2 points above? Are we ok moving forward with the implementation or if you would have updates on them could you please let us know when will this happen?

Many thanks,
Calin

------------------------------
Calin Mates
IBM Corporation
------------------------------