Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

docs: update Message Example payload type #1082

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

docs: update Message Example payload type #1082

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
bebbbab
docs: update Message Example headers and payload
Pakisan Dec 31, 2024
c2e190c
fix: wrong type of payload and headers in MessageExample
Pakisan Jan 9, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 2 additions & 2 deletions spec/asyncapi.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -1453,8 +1453,8 @@ Message Example Object represents an example of a [Message Object](#messageObjec

Field Name | Type | Description
---|:---:|---
<a name="messageExampleObjectHeaders"></a>headers | `Map[string, any]` | The value of this field MUST validate against the [Message Object's headers](#messageObjectHeaders) field.
<a name="messageExampleObjectPayload"></a>payload | `Map[string, any]` | The value of this field MUST validate against the [Message Object's payload](#messageObjectPayload) field.
<a name="messageExampleObjectHeaders"></a>headers | `any` | The value of this field MUST validate against the [Message Object's headers](#messageObjectHeaders) field.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the change is justified for payload as it can be an array, for instance. However, I'm not sure in which cases headers could be anything different than a map.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@fmvilas Yep, I thought same way, but after this I re-read definitions and it may by of any type

In Message we are defining schema for payload and headers. This two properties are JSON Schema or Multi format Schema

So they can be of any defined and valid JSON Schema type - string, number, object, etc. Or Avro type

This is main reason to define headers and payload in MessageExample as any type and validate them trough it's schemas in Message object

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The definition of headers explicitly says:

Schema MUST be a map of key-value pairs.

So it can't be any, right?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

headers

IMHO headers should stay as it is. It was always like this, in previous versions too, key/value as this is who headers look like.

So they can be of any defined and valid JSON Schema type - string, number, object, etc. Or Avro type

spec is more specific in case of headers if you compare with payload

Schema MUST be a map of key-value pairs

payload

In case of payload. This is what it was before v3 which makes sense as payload is any

<a name="messageExampleObjectHeaders"></a>headers | `Map[string, any]` | The value of this field MUST validate against the [Message Object's headers](#messageObjectHeaders) field.

<a name="messageExampleObjectPayload"></a>payload | `any` | The value of this field MUST validate against the [Message Object's payload](#messageObjectPayload) field.

in v3 we introduced Multi Format Schema Object, so payload can also be payload.schema and payload.schemaFormat and definition of payload was changed from any to Multi Format Schema Object | Schema Object | Reference Object but yeah, because of Schema Object it is still basically any.

which means message payload example should also be any.

I went through #910 but I see that we were 100% focused there on the message.payload definition and Multi Format Schema Object that the change in Message Example Object Payload type was overlooked.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@fmvilas @derberg I have returned Map[string, any] to headers

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, @Pakisan! Approved ✅

<a name="messageExampleObjectPayload"></a>payload | `any` | The value of this field MUST validate against the [Message Object's payload](#messageObjectPayload) field.
<a name="messageExampleObjectName"></a>name | `string` | A machine-friendly name.
<a name="messageExampleObjectSummary"></a>summary | `string` | A short summary of what the example is about.

Expand Down
Loading