Mutliple Observation in API Endpoint "/api/policy-hub/policy-content

[mkanal]

Reference:

• https://github.com/eclipse-tractusx/policy-hub/blob/feature/request-docu/docs/developer/Technical-Documentation/requests/example-requests.md

Observation 1:

Requesting API Endpoint "/api/policy-hub/policy-content" Membership Key with invalid Value.

Endpoint: /api/policy-hub/policy-content
Request body

{
    "PolicyType": "Usage",
    "ConstraintOperand": "And",
    "Constraints": [
        {
            "Key": "Membership",
            "Operator": "Equals",
            "Value": "XXXXXX"
        }
    ]
}

Current Behavior

Response contains valid rightOperand="active",

"odrl:and": [
                    {
                        "leftOperand": "Membership",
                        "operator": "eq",
                        "rightOperand": "active"
                    }
                ]

Expected Behavior

Instead of correcting the constraint, an error was expected with details addressing the incorrect value.

Remark:

Is this a misunderstanding of the functionality of the endpoint the behavior correctly?

Observation 2:

Requesting API Endpoint "/api/policy-hub/policy-content " "Key": "FrameworkAgreement.traceability" and invalid value

Endpoint: /api/policy-hub/policy-content
Request body

{
    "PolicyType": "Usage",
    "ConstraintOperand": "And",
    "Constraints": [
        {
            "Key": "FrameworkAgreement.traceability",
            "Operator": "Equals",
            "Value" : "active:28.0"
        }
    ]
}

Current Behavior

 "@type": "Offer",
        "@id": "....",
        "permission": {
            "action": "use",
            "constraint": {
                "odrl:and": [
                    {
                        "leftOperand": "FrameworkAgreement.traceability",
                        "operator": "eq",
                        "rightOperand": "@FrameworkAgreement.traceability-Version"
                    }
                ]
            }
        }
    },
    "attributes": [
        {
            "key": "@FrameworkAgreement.traceability-Version",
            "possibleValues": [
                "active:1.0",
                "active:1.1",
                "active:1.2"
            ]
        }
    ]

Expected Behavior

Instead of providing an attribute list with possible Values, an error was expected with details addressing an incorrect value.

Remark:

Is this a misunderstanding of the functionality of the endpoint, the behavior correctly?

Observation 3:

Requesting API Endpoint "/api/policy-hub/policy-content " "Key": "BusinessPartnerNumber" and invalid Value

{
    "PolicyType": "Usage",
    "ConstraintOperand": "And",
    "Constraints": [
            {
            "Key": "BusinessPartnerNumber",
            "Operator": "Equals",
            "Value": "BPNL00000003"
        }

As expected, an 400 with error description is returned

{
    "type": "https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7231#section-6.5.1",
    "title": "One or more validation errors occurred.",
    "status": 400,
    "errors": {
        "value": [
            "The provided value BPNL00000003 does not match the regex pattern ^BPNL[\\w|\\d]{12}$ (Parameter 'value')"
        ]
    },
    "errorId": "5134512d-0eae-4cec-ad53-4a249f013269",
    "details": []
}

Observation 4:

Requesting API Endpoint "/api/policy-hub/policy-content " "Key": "purpose" and no value

Endpoint: /api/policy-hub/policy-content
Request body

{
    "PolicyType": "Usage",
    "ConstraintOperand": "And",
    "Constraints": [
           {
            "Key": "purpose",
            "Operator": "Equals"
        }

    ]
}

Current Behavior

{
    "content": {
        "@context": [
            "https://www.w3.org/ns/odrl.jsonld",
            {
                "cx": "https://w3id.org/catenax/v0.0.1/ns/"
            }
        ],
        "@type": "Offer",
        "@id": "....",
        "permission": {
            "action": "use",
            "constraint": {
                "odrl:and": [
                    {
                        "leftOperand": "purpose",
                        "operator": "eq",
                        "rightOperand": "{dynamicValue}"
                    }
                ]
            }
        }
    }
}

Expected Behavior

Instead of {dynamicValue} values valid values are expected. In case calling {{baseUrl}}/api/policy-hub/policy-types?useCase=Traceability the purpose is well-defined

 {
        "technicalKey": "purpose",
        "type": [
            "Usage"
        ],
        "description": "",
        "useCase": [
            "Traceability"
        ],
        "attribute": [
            {
                "key": "Static",
                "value": "ID Trace 3.1"
            }
        ],
        "technicalEnforced": false
    }

Observation 5:

What is the purpose of "technicalEnforced": false /true? What impact has this regarding a business, app?

Observation 6:

Endpoint: /api/policy-hub/policy-content
Request body

{
    "PolicyType": "Usage",
    "ConstraintOperand": "And",
    "Constraints": [
           {
            "Key": "purpose",
            "Operator": "Equals",
            "Value": "By accepting this policy you have to pay 1K BC"
        }

    ]
}

Current Behavior

{
    "PolicyType": "Usage",
    "ConstraintOperand": "And",
    "Constraints": [
           {
            "Key": "purpose",
            "Operator": "Equals",
            "Value": "By accepting this policy you have to pay 1K BC"
        }

    ]
}

Expected Behavior`

Error message with http status code 400 that value is not allowed. Only "ID Trace 3.1" is allowed.

Observation 7:

Why namespace is only used for logicalOperand Or and And ?

[jjeroch]

@mkanal thanks for the input.

• Observation 1: 50:50....as we spoke last week; yes the endpoint is not supposed to get used to validate an policy rule; instead this endpoint creates the correct policy rule/template. However still I agree that we should ideally provide a different feedback
• Observation 2: same as above - Unexpected response for POST policy-content - Purpose #68
• Observation 3: yes that looks good/better
• Observation 4: will recheck it
• Observation 5: It informs you whether this policy is automatically validated. If the value is 'true', it indicates that the requesting customer compliance of that policy will get validated as part of the communication between the connectors. Please let me know if you have any suggestions for better wording.
• Observation 6: thanks; thats an defect; we will fix it asap - Unexpected response for POST policy-content - Purpose #68
• Observation 7: this will completely change with 24.05.

[evegufy]

I'll go ahead with closing the issue as it's stale since a couple of months, feel free to reopen if something might be still open