Meeting: May 13th, 2025

[earth2marsh]

Weekly meetings happen on Tuesdays

Time: 5pm GMT / 9am Pacific
Zoom: https://zoom-lfx.platform.linuxfoundation.org/meeting/98869769538?password=d769f940-7da7-4de8-9fab-685a1cc8f33e

Accessibility & Etiquette

• Participants must abide by our Code-of-Conduct.
• Meetings are recorded for future reference, and for those who are not able to attend in-person.
• We invited challenges to language or behaviour that is harmful or not inclusive during this meeting.
• We look forward to your participation, but please consider these acts of etiquette:
  • Remain on mute when not speaking to prevent interruptions.
  • Blur your background to reduce visual distractions.
  • Use the Zoom meeting "Raise Hand" feature to notify the group when you wish to speak.

Blur My Background	Raise Hand

Agenda Structure

Topic	Owner	Decision/NextStep
Intros and governance meta-topics (5 mins)	SIG members	--
General discussion topics (list below)	SIG members	--
Wrap-up and seed the next agenda (5 mins)	SIG members	--

Whether attending or not, anyone can comment on this issue prior to the meeting to suggest topics or to add comments on planned topics or proposals.

[earth2marsh]

Continue discussion of: #187 (comment)

[darrelmiller]

Outcome of this discussion:

We should explore a dual approach: URLs on "rails" that enable us to guarantee deterministic routing. Freeform URLs that enable describing existing APIs that do not conform but do not have the same guarantees.

URI Templates are not designed for parsing URLs. We need to investigate alternative declarative URL description formats that can support both construction and parsing, as well as aid with serialization of typed parameters.

[hudlow]

Here's another perspective. JSON Schema actually does provide a tool from which we can construct "priorities" and statically require unambiguous behavior and allow every operation to be considered in isolation. It's maybe not elegant or attractive, but it does work.

Let's say I have two paths, /{foo} and /{bar}, and their parameters are given two schemas:

Foo:
  type: string
  pattern: X
Bar:
  type: string
  pattern: Y

Now I have ambiguity that can't be resolved statically, and might or might not actually result in a runtime collision. How can the schemas solve this?

Foo:
  type: string
  pattern: X
Bar:
  type: string
  pattern: Y
  not:
    $ref: '#/Foo'

And if it's three schemas?

Foo:
  type: string
  pattern: X
Bar:
  type: string
  pattern: Y
  not:
    $ref: '#/Foo'
Baz:
  type: string
  pattern: Z
  not:
    anyOf:
    - $ref: '#/Foo'
    - $ref: '#/Bar'

Again, I don't find the solution of forcing authors to use explicit not applicators in their schemas so we can statically analyze them to be non-overlapping is very satisfying, especially when it still means the best a client can do to make sure it invokes the operation it means to is pre-run the input through the schema and throw an error if it fails (not having any other recourse). But I figure it's worth mentioning this as a way of expressing mutual exclusion.