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.

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

Maintenance Iteration 18 Holistic Feedback #629

Closed
CDR-API-Stream opened this issue Jan 17, 2024 · 14 comments
Closed

Maintenance Iteration 18 Holistic Feedback #629

CDR-API-Stream opened this issue Jan 17, 2024 · 14 comments
Assignees
Labels
Non-breaking change A change that is not expected to result in a new endpoint version.
Milestone

Comments

@CDR-API-Stream
Copy link
Collaborator

This change request has been created to simplify the raising of minor changes, such as text corrections or description clarifications, that are not really material to the standards but do have a real impact on readability and clarity.

Please raise any such suggestions that you would like included in Maintenance Iteration 18 and the DSB will review them. If a suggestion is a material change a dedicated CR will be raised.

@nils-work nils-work added this to the v1.30.0 milestone Jan 18, 2024
@nils-work nils-work added the Non-breaking change A change that is not expected to result in a new endpoint version. label Jan 18, 2024
@nils-work nils-work moved this from Full Backlog to Iteration Candidates in Data Standards Maintenance Jan 30, 2024
@nils-work
Copy link
Member

There is a typo in the following text in the Security Endpoints section -

Data Recipient Software Products MUST NOT reject requests including the cdr_arragement_id as a form parameter.

cdr_arragement_id should be cdr_arrangement_id

@markverstege
Copy link
Member

The following Register APIs incorrectly specify a message body for 401 error responses:

  • Get Data Holder Brands
  • Get Software Statement Assertion (SSA)

The change is to remove ResponseErrorListV2 as the listed schema. These APIs conform to RFC6750 returning an oAuth error in the WWW-Authenticate response header.

@nils-work
Copy link
Member

Two sentences at the start of the Participant Statuses section refer to 'Software Package'. These appear to be mistakes, and should be updated to 'Software Product' for consistency.

@nils-work
Copy link
Member

The ClientRegistration schema is not referenced by any endpoints, but represents the decoded string(JWT) specified in the ClientRegistrationRequest.

To provide clarity, the ClientRegistration schema could be referenced in the description of the ClientRegistrationRequest field as follows (bold text to highlight the addition only) –

The registration request JWT to be used to register with a Data Holder. The schema of the payload section of the decoded string(JWT) is defined in ClientRegistration.

@nils-work
Copy link
Member

A point under Data Holders in the Request Object section states -

  • Data Holders MUST require PAR for authorisation request data in accordance with [RFC9126] where "require_pushed_authorization_requests" parameter is set to "true".

while it should be clear from other statements in the Standards and the upstream spec., the last word ("true") could be changed to true to better convey that the value is expected to be a Boolean.

@nils-work
Copy link
Member

The following line in the Non-normative Examples alongside HTTP Headers should be removed; it is not an Accept header like others in that block and the value appears to be mismatched with the name -

Accept-Encoding: charset=UTF-8

@ACCC-CDR
Copy link

Update Register API descriptions

The ACCC suggests that two Register endpoint descriptions should be updated to clarify when data holders are expected to begin appearing in responses, and what information is currently available. This is intended to address questions raised by stakeholders.

We suggest that the relevant endpoint descriptions should be updated to specify that:

  • Get Data Holder Brands Summary includes all data holder brands for which product reference data is available. For data holders that are active for consumer data sharing, the value disclosed is the public base uri. For brands that are not active for consumer data sharing, the value disclosed is the uri that discloses product data relevant to that brand, as provided by the relevant data holder.
  • Get Data Holder Brands includes all data holders that have become active for consumer data sharing and have not been archived.

We suggest that the API description in the specification be updated to ensure that users of these endpoints understand their behaviour and the differences between them.

These clarifications reflect current Register behaviour. Accordingly, we consider that this change is non-breaking change.

Area Affected

Change Proposed
Register APIs: To include the following information in the endpoint descriptions:

  • Get Data Holder Brands Summary includes all data holder brands for which product reference data is available. For data holders who are active for consumer data sharing, the value disclosed is their public base uri. For data holders who are not active for consumer data sharing, the value disclosed is the uri that discloses product data relevant to that brand.
  • Get Data Holder Brands includes all data holders who have become active for consumer data sharing and have not been archived.

@nils-work nils-work self-assigned this Mar 17, 2024
nils-work added a commit to ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging that referenced this issue Mar 18, 2024
nils-work added a commit to ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging that referenced this issue Mar 18, 2024
nils-work added a commit to ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging that referenced this issue Mar 18, 2024
nils-work added a commit to ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging that referenced this issue Mar 18, 2024
nils-work added a commit to ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging that referenced this issue Mar 18, 2024
nils-work added a commit to ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging that referenced this issue Mar 18, 2024
@nils-work
Copy link
Member

The following change has been staged for review:

There is a typo in the following text in the Security Endpoints section -

Data Recipient Software Products MUST NOT reject requests including the cdr_arragement_id as a form parameter.

cdr_arragement_id should be cdr_arrangement_id

ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging@release/1.30.0...maintenance/629#issuecomment-1920466440

@nils-work
Copy link
Member

The following change has been staged for review:

The following Register APIs incorrectly specify a message body for 401 error responses:

  • Get Data Holder Brands
  • Get Software Statement Assertion (SSA)

The change is to remove ResponseErrorListV2 as the listed schema. These APIs conform to RFC6750 returning an oAuth error in the WWW-Authenticate response header.

ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging@release/1.30.0...maintenance/629#issuecomment-1930936447

@nils-work
Copy link
Member

The following change has been staged for review:

Two sentences at the start of the Participant Statuses section refer to 'Software Package'. These appear to be mistakes, and should be updated to 'Software Product' for consistency.

ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging@release/1.30.0...maintenance/629#issuecomment-1938107616

@nils-work
Copy link
Member

The following change has been staged for review:

The ClientRegistration schema is not referenced by any endpoints, but represents the decoded string(JWT) specified in the ClientRegistrationRequest.

To provide clarity, the ClientRegistration schema could be referenced in the description of the ClientRegistrationRequest field as follows (bold text to highlight the addition only) –

The registration request JWT to be used to register with a Data Holder. The schema of the payload section of the decoded string(JWT) is defined in ClientRegistration.

ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging@release/1.30.0...maintenance/629#issuecomment-1940397162

@nils-work
Copy link
Member

The following change has been staged for review:

A point under Data Holders in the Request Object section states -

  • Data Holders MUST require PAR for authorisation request data in accordance with [RFC9126] where "require_pushed_authorization_requests" parameter is set to "true".

while it should be clear from other statements in the Standards and the upstream spec., the last word ("true") could be changed to true to better convey that the value is expected to be a Boolean.

ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging@release/1.30.0...maintenance/629#issuecomment-1956098319

@nils-work
Copy link
Member

The following change has been staged for review:

The following line in the Non-normative Examples alongside HTTP Headers should be removed; it is not an Accept header like others in that block and the value appears to be mismatched with the name -

Accept-Encoding: charset=UTF-8

ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging@release/1.30.0...maintenance/629#issuecomment-1968023646

@nils-work nils-work moved this from Iteration Candidates to In Progress: Design in Data Standards Maintenance Mar 21, 2024
@nils-work nils-work moved this from In Progress: Design to In Progress: Staging in Data Standards Maintenance Apr 9, 2024
@nils-work nils-work moved this from In Progress: Staging to Awaiting Chair Approval in Data Standards Maintenance Apr 16, 2024
JamesMBligh added a commit to ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards that referenced this issue Apr 24, 2024
* 1.30.0 branch

* Updates to base build

* Update releasenotes.1.30.0.html.md

* Updated release notes templates

* Corrected typo in Description

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging#361

* Updated links

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging#362

* Updated Principles text for CX

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging#370

* Improved wrapping for long lines

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging#371

* Adding version delta and release notes

* Updates to 'Revoking consent' Standards

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#631

* Removed two outdated statements

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#632

* Corrected typo in `cdr_arragement_id`

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#629 (comment)

* Changed 'Software Package' to 'Software Product'

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#629 (comment)

* Updated documentation to include link

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#629 (comment)

* Clarified documentation

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#629 (comment)

* Updated Non-normative Example

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#629 (comment)

* Clarified Register endpoint responses

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#629 (comment)

* Applied change to Register API in NBL Candidate

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#629 (comment)

* Template code change

Change log and version delta details TBC.
Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging#376

* Removed unused Format column

* Updated template and schema mapping

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging#376

* Removed outdated statements and examples

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#543

* Fixed typo

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging#388

* Updated date format

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-staging#310

* Updated based on feedback in MI18

Addresses: ConsumerDataStandardsAustralia/standards-maintenance#543 (comment)

* Standards Maintenance Issue #624: Converted solarFeedInTariff.timeVaryingTariffs into an array. Added new mandatory displayName field to solarFeedInTariff.timeVaryingTariffs

* Standards Maintenance Issue #625: Added optional period field to various energy rate objects to help support stepped tariff calculation

* Standards Maintenance Issue #627: Made changes to EnergyPlanTariffPeriod to allow sharing of banded daily supply charges

* Standards Maintenance Issue #627: Corrected bandedDailySupplyCharges to an array. Fixed typos in FDO table

* Standards Maintenance Issue #627: Fixed typos in field descriptions

* Standards Maintenance Issue #625: Fixed typos in FDO table

* Standards Maintenance Issue #624: Fixed typos in FDO table

* Standards Maintenance Issue #624: Added new ENUM values CURRENT and VARIABLE to solarFeedInTariff.scheme

* Standards Maintenance Issue #625: Corrected diff and release notes including as part of the change

* Remove spaces causing extra lines when wrapping

* Moving the typo correction to a separate issue

* Final updates to 1.30.0

---------

Co-authored-by: Nils Berge <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Hemang Rathod <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Mark Verstege <[email protected]>
@nils-work nils-work moved this from Awaiting Chair Approval to Done in Data Standards Maintenance Apr 26, 2024
@nils-work
Copy link
Member

Standards version 1.30.0 was published on 24/04/2024 incorporating changes from MI18.
This comment was not resolved and has been transferred to issue #637.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Non-breaking change A change that is not expected to result in a new endpoint version.
Projects
Status: Done
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants