Expert review criteria for registries (How exactly does x-twitter work?)

[dret]

https://spec.openapis.org/registry/extension/index.html lists x-twitter (which now could become x-x...) and there is no published/referenced spec. Just out of curiosity, what's the data type of that extension and assuming it's a string, do you put the handle in there (with or without @) and if it is a URI, is there a a recommended/suggested template for Twitter/X user URIs?

[handrews]

@dret if you click on "x-twitter" it takes you to its specification page which shows you that it's a string. It looks like it doesn't include the @ but that is something its spec should say.

I am in favor of us defining "expert review" rules for what is needed to accept things into each registry. At the moment, I'm the de-facto expert review for the format registry (which is ironic because I consider format to be unusably unreliable in practice, but that's a rant for another day...).

[dret]

On 2024-06-11 19:22, Henry Andrews wrote: @dret <https://github.com/dret> if you click on "x-twitter" it takes you to its specification page <https://spec.openapis.org/registry/extension/x-twitter.html> which shows you that it's a string. It looks like it doesn't include the |@| but that is something its spec should say.

Oooops, my bad. The example is wrong though and missing quoted. I will create a PR.

I am in favor of us defining "expert review" rules for what is needed to accept things into each registry. At the moment, I'm the de-facto expert review for the |format| registry (which is ironic because I consider |format| to be unusably unreliable in practice, but that's a rant for another day...).

I think that is a good idea. IANA does it per registry, but for the moment that's probably overkill.

[dret]

On 2024-06-12 11:06, Erik Wilde wrote: On 2024-06-11 19:22, Henry Andrews wrote: > @dret <https://github.com/dret> if you click on "x-twitter" it takes you to its specification page <https://spec.openapis.org/registry/extension/x-twitter.html> which shows you that it's a string. It looks like it doesn't include the |@| but that is something its spec should say. Oooops, my bad. The example is wrong though and missing quoted. I will create a PR.

Forget this. For some reason I am still having JSON syntax in my head even when I read YAML. Too much JSON in my life...

[dret]

Feel free to close this if you think what's currently there is good enough, @handrews.

[handrews]

Let's just repurpose this for tracking the "expert review" criteria - I'll edit the title.

[lornajane]

I propose closing this issue, the maintainers will review to their best judgement and additional process doesn't seem that helpful. Any comments?