Skip to content

3.1.0 - Addition of "summary" to the API info is confusing #2392

Closed

Description

@InfoSec812

What does "summary" give us that "description" does not? Perhaps "summary" could just be an alias for "description"?

Activity

  1. MikeRalphson commented on Nov 2, 2020

    @MikeRalphson
    Member

    See #832 and #1779 for the rationale for this field being added and the differences between title, summary and description. The OAS does not have the concept of aliases, and I for one would not like to see them introduced.

    What do you find confusing?

  2. InfoSec812 commented on Nov 2, 2020

    @InfoSec812
    ContributorAuthor

    I think that some of the context from those two issues could help clarify in the 3.1.0 document. Right now, I did not understand that from what I read in the standard. If it is explained somewhere else, then perhaps a link to that explanation?

  3. MikeRalphson commented on Nov 2, 2020

    @MikeRalphson
    Member

    The line is always between conciseness, clarity, consistency and completeness. The summary and description fields have their different usage descriptions framed in the same manner as for other objects (such as pathItem and operation). If you can formulate a wording improvement to either or both field descriptions, a PR would be welcome.

  4. darrelmiller commented on Nov 3, 2020

    @darrelmiller
    Member

    @InfoSec812 When presenting information it is common to have a list view of data and a detail view. summary is optimized to represent data in a list view, description is optimized for a detail view. description enables rich text which is useful in documentation. summary does not support rich text as that can cause presentation issues when presenting a list of summary values.

    summary is an optional field so you can choose not to use it if it is not useful for your scenario. Adding summary to info was a request from the community and it created consistency with other objects in the specification. This felt like sufficient justification for its inclusion.

  5. InfoSec812 commented on Nov 3, 2020

    @InfoSec812
    ContributorAuthor

    @darrelmiller Now that I have had it explained by @MikeRalphson I agree. What I would like to do, and thus the PR, is make that obvious to everyone who reads the specification/standard by adding the definition and providing links to that information.

  6. darrelmiller commented on Nov 12, 2020

    @darrelmiller
    Member

    @philsturgeon is going to remove the word "short" from the description of description. Hopefully this is more descriptive.

  7. philsturgeon commented on Nov 12, 2020

    @philsturgeon
    Contributor
  8. MikeRalphson commented on Jun 18, 2021

    @MikeRalphson
    Member

    #2408 was merged, closing this. Thanks all.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

      Milestone

      No milestone

      Relationships

      None yet

      Development

      No branches or pull requests

      Issue actions