Hi Members/experts,Within my company we have decided to make extensive use of TMF-669 (Party Role Management) with a number of sub-classes to suit our needs. When we try to refer to these Party Roles via the relatedParty lines across the various other TMFs we provide the "id" and "@referredType" required/mandatory attributes as you would expect to be needed. These two "required" attributes for relatedParty seems to be common to all the TMFs we're using except for TMF-641 which for some reason additionally wants @type. Is this deliberate or a mistake? We have no intention to sub-class the relatedParty array itself so why does TMF-641 seem to want you to define "@type" : "relatedParty" ?https://tmf-open-api-table-documents.s3.eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/OpenApiTable/4.1.0/swagger/TMF641-ServiceOrdering-v4.1.0.swagger.jsonThanks,Jonathan
Can anyone help / advise here. I'm trying to avoid integration development because of this potential error in the standards rather that supporting a data type that is of no use.
Hi JonathanI looked into this, it does seem to be an anomaly. The rules file that we use to generate swaggers for APIs has @type mandatory in relatedParty for TMF641, but not in other APIs.I can open a defect report, but I'm not sure that there is priority for republishing v4 APIs.Please note that in v5 APIs @type is mandatory in entities since it is used as a discriminator.Hope it helps
Many thanks for replying Mr. G. It's great to see you have observed the same as me.Re: "Please note that in v5 APIs @type is mandatory in entities since it is used as a discriminator." - does this mean all TMFs that make use of relatedParty will in the future will require @type as a required line? Hence I will need to supply "@type": "relatedParty" ?Thanks again.