I am trying to document with OpenAPI a query string which look like
filtered[0][id]=code&filtered[0][value]=12345
and contains a list of object with properties id
and value
.
My yaml
documentation looks like the following
parameters:
- name: filtered
in: query
description: filters to be applied
explode: true
style: deepObject
schema:
type: array
items:
properties:
id:
description: name of the field to be filtered
type: string
value:
description: value of the filter
type: object
The problem is the following: it looks like the style: deepObject
option works only for one level, and not at the second level where my objects actually are. That is, it expects a query string like
?sorted[0]=%7B%0A%20%20%22id%22%3A%20%22string%22%2C%0A%20%20%22value%22%3A%20true%0A%7D
with the object not serialized as an array with id
and value
keys.
Is there a way to solve this?
As name implies, :), deepObject style only "provides a simple way of rendering nested objects", not arrays. At the least according to Version 3.0.1 it applies only to objects.
Note that even nested objects might be not yet supported by tools because the specification "does not provide such examples".
So your format is not compatible with Open API, yet may be you can define you query as parameters which follow a regex. I such cases usually I do my best yet provide some explanation
https://swagger.io/specification/
Update. Apparently, after somebody demanded a 'descriptive error' message for nested objects, the nested objects support is added to swagger-js v.3.9. https://github.com/swagger-api/swagger-js/pull/1450
This is not possible as of OpenAPI 3.0.2.
OpenAPI 3.0 Specification currently defines the
deepObject
behavior only for simple objects (with primitive properties) such asbut not for arrays and not for nested objects.
Since the behavior for arrays and nested objects is not defined, there's really no way to describe your query string. Technically, the only way would be to define
filtered[0][id]
,filtered[0][value]
, etc. as individual query parameters.If you are designing a new API (rather than describing an existing one), consider passing the array of objects in the request body instead.