Open APIs

Expand all | Collapse all

Disparity with related party field in TMF670 API

  • 1.  Disparity with related party field in TMF670 API

    Posted 8 days ago
    Edited by Dheeraj dheeraj.joshi@nokia.com 8 days ago
    Hi
    In TMF670 Payment method management API document resource model depicts related party with 0 or 1 relation. However in the swagger json it is depicted as array.
    Why a related party should be array?

    Resource model for payment method management

    In the above diagram related party could be either 0 or 1.

    But in swagger json it is array. tmforum-apis/TMF670_PaymentMethods (Line number 45) it is an array, Should it be one object or array of object?

    ------------------------------
    ~Dheeraj Joshi

    Nokia
    dheeraj.joshi@nokia.com
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Disparity with related party field in TMF670 API

    TM Forum Member
    Posted 8 days ago
    Hi Djeeraj

    Thanks for your alertness in raising this issue.

    The Payment Methods API published version is rather old, and it's currently being revised (work still in progress). Perhaps @Dominic Oyeniran, who leads this API, can give an idea and relate to the planning.
    As a general rule, recently published APIs are being generated so that the swagger and the user guide (new name for the spec) come from the same source and there should be no discrepancy.​​

    Hope it helps

    ------------------------------
    Jonathan Goldberg
    Amdocs Management Limited
    Any opinions and statements made by me on this forum are purely personal, and do not necessarily reflect the position of the TM Forum or my employer.
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: Disparity with related party field in TMF670 API

    Posted 8 days ago
    Edited by Dheeraj dheeraj.joshi@nokia.com 8 days ago
    Thanks for the reply Jonathan
    Since we have already started implementation of V1 of TMF 670 we are going to consider related party could be either 0 or 1. From our internal discussion about the use cases we don't see a reason why related party could be more than one. Anyhow we will also wait for new version to be available.

    @Dominic Oyeniran What are the target dates for new version of TMF670? Will there be any early drops available? I ask this because i don't see payment method specs in early adoption (Beta) page Open API Table - Early Adoption (Beta)

    ------------------------------
    ~Dheeraj Joshi

    Nokia
    dheeraj.joshi@nokia.com
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: Disparity with related party field in TMF670 API

    TM Forum Member
    Posted 7 days ago

    HellO Djeeraj,

    The new schemafied version of TMF670 Payment method API is currently going through tmf internal processes to complete all specs and additional artefacts. I do not have a specific ETA as the timeline is contingent on this process but I expect this can be wrapped up in this quarter or the next. That said, I can confirm that in the new version that relatedParty is not an array - (It is either 0 or 1)  so it aligns with your use case.

    Hope that helps. 

    Regards,

    Dominic Oyeniran
    Vodafone Group



    ------------------------------
    Dominic Oyeniran
    Vodafone Group
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: Disparity with related party field in TMF670 API

    Posted 7 days ago
    Thanks @Dominic Oyeniran.
    Appreciate your help.​

    ------------------------------
    ~Dheeraj Joshi

    Nokia
    dheeraj.joshi@nokia.com
    ------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: Disparity with related party field in TMF670 API

    TM Forum Member
    Posted 7 days ago

    Hi dheeraj.joshi@nokia.com" data-itemmentionkey="b57321bf-5ec5-4973-9979-017ca5911ff7" biobubblekey="mention7074cce3-0e0d-4b85-91fe-52ef90ddc25b" href="https://engage.tmforum.org/network/members/profile?UserKey=7074cce3-0e0d-4b85-91fe-52ef90ddc25b" data-can-remove="False">@Dheeraj dheeraj.joshi@nokia.com

    The new schemafied version of TMF670 Payment method API is currently going through tmf internal processes to complete all specs and additional artefacts. I do not have a specific ETA as the timeline is contingent on this process but I expect this can be wrapped up in this quarter or early next quarter. That said, I can confirm that in the new version that relatedParty is not an array - It is either 0 or 1- so it aligns with your use case.

    Hope that helps.

    Regards,

    Dominic Oyeniran
    Vodafone Group



    ------------------------------
    Dominic Oyeniran
    Vodafone Group
    ------------------------------