Open APIs

Hello,

While implementing and certifying against TMF702, I've noticed a discrepancy between the official specification and the CTK/conformance test kit regarding the name attribute in the Resource entity:

• In the TMF702 Resource Activation Management API v4.0.0 Specification (TMF702_Resource_Activation_Management_API_v4.0.0_specification.pdf), the name attribute is not listed as a mandatory field for the Resource entity. Additionally, the sample payloads for POST (create resource) operations do not include name in either the request or the response.

• However, the CTK (Conformance Test Kit) for TMF702 defines name as a required attribute in its payload configuration, and the tests verify its presence in both request and response payloads.

Could you clarify what the expected behavior is regarding the name attribute?

• Should implementations require and return the name attribute (as enforced by the CTK)?

• Or is the specification correct in treating it as non-mandatory?

• Is there an official guidance on which source of truth to follow if the CTK and the specification differ in attribute requirements?

Is there something I might have overlooked in the interpretation of either document?

Thank you for your guidance!

Hi Yasyl

The Conformance Profile (source of truth) has the name field as mandatory so I believe that the CTK is correct (as below).  As far as the OAS goes, there are plans to resolve the discrepancies at v6 (in the API schema in github).  

Hello,

While implementing and certifying against TMF702, I've noticed a discrepancy between the official specification and the CTK/conformance test kit regarding the name attribute in the Resource entity:

• In the TMF702 Resource Activation Management API v4.0.0 Specification (TMF702_Resource_Activation_Management_API_v4.0.0_specification.pdf), the name attribute is not listed as a mandatory field for the Resource entity. Additionally, the sample payloads for POST (create resource) operations do not include name in either the request or the response.

• However, the CTK (Conformance Test Kit) for TMF702 defines name as a required attribute in its payload configuration, and the tests verify its presence in both request and response payloads.

Could you clarify what the expected behavior is regarding the name attribute?

• Should implementations require and return the name attribute (as enforced by the CTK)?

• Or is the specification correct in treating it as non-mandatory?

• Is there an official guidance on which source of truth to follow if the CTK and the specification differ in attribute requirements?

Is there something I might have overlooked in the interpretation of either document?

Thank you for your guidance!

Hi Dan,

Thanks for the response.

I hope that consolidation you mentioned wil resolve all conflicts including TMF702_Resource_Activation_Management_API_v4.0.0_specification.pdf which lists name a optional attribute and provides request/response examples without it.  :

Thank You

Vasyl

Hi Yasyl

The Conformance Profile (source of truth) has the name field as mandatory so I believe that the CTK is correct (as below).  As far as the OAS goes, there are plans to resolve the discrepancies at v6 (in the API schema in github).  

Hello,

While implementing and certifying against TMF702, I've noticed a discrepancy between the official specification and the CTK/conformance test kit regarding the name attribute in the Resource entity:

• In the TMF702 Resource Activation Management API v4.0.0 Specification (TMF702_Resource_Activation_Management_API_v4.0.0_specification.pdf), the name attribute is not listed as a mandatory field for the Resource entity. Additionally, the sample payloads for POST (create resource) operations do not include name in either the request or the response.

• However, the CTK (Conformance Test Kit) for TMF702 defines name as a required attribute in its payload configuration, and the tests verify its presence in both request and response payloads.

Could you clarify what the expected behavior is regarding the name attribute?

• Should implementations require and return the name attribute (as enforced by the CTK)?

• Or is the specification correct in treating it as non-mandatory?

• Is there an official guidance on which source of truth to follow if the CTK and the specification differ in attribute requirements?

Is there something I might have overlooked in the interpretation of either document?

Thank you for your guidance!