RFC 6570 tooling support

[jonaslagoni]

Reason/Context

With the specification, we define our channels with the RFC 6570 standard. However, from a tool perspective, this fact can easily be overlooked (at least I severely overlooked it) with ts-nats-template). This means, that once we want to realize the channel we must support different features of variable expansion, and other features of RFC 6570.

This is not something that all tooling providers can be expected to implement on their own.

Description

So how do we make it easily supported so the quality of tooling does not degrade based on which one you use? (In terms of channel realization)

I tried to look for already existing tools:

• https://github.com/LuvDaSun/rfc6570 - unmaintained and not a stable version
• https://github.com/grncdr/uri-template - might be maintained, and seem stable, not sure how easy this could be integrated?
• https://www.npmjs.com/package/urijs - maintained, not sure how well it works with RFC 6570

And if we use third-party tools - even help maintain them, how can we best help tool owners, be aware of this 🤔?

[derberg]

And if we use third-party tools - even help maintain them, how can we best help tool owners, be aware of this 🤔?

I don't think there is another way than examples and docs. Just like with Modelina, how can you make sure folks use modelina instead of templating data model on their own? examples and docs 👍🏼