The reason it uses "parameters" is that 6749 uses "parameter" instead of "object" or "member", even where describing the piece-parts of JSON-encoded structures. However, it's a good point that "array of parameters" may cross the awkwardness line. (6749 doesn't involve any arrays.) Any other thoughts?

Eve Maler
Cell +1 425.345.6756 | Skype: xmlgrrl | Twitter: @xmlgrrl

On Tue, May 30, 2017 at 7:31 AM, Salvatore D'Agostino <sal@idmachines.com> wrote:

Can you just say array..

-----Original Message-----
From: wg-uma-bounces@kantarainitiative.org
[mailto:wg-uma-bounces@kantarainitiative.org] On Behalf Of Mike Schwartz
Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 10:26 AM
To: uma wg <wg-uma@kantarainitiative.org>
Subject: [WG-UMA] required claims definition: array of object?

Another editorial suggestion...

https://docs.kantarainitiative.org/uma/ed/oauth-uma-grant-2.0-04.html#author

ization-failure

required_claims
"An array containing parameters that describe the required claims, with
the following subparameters:"

Is parameters the right word there? Would objects be better? Maybe something
like:

required_claims
"An array containing objects that describe the required claims, with the
following keys."

- Mike
_______________________________________________
WG-UMA mailing list
WG-UMA@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-uma

_______________________________________________
WG-UMA mailing list
WG-UMA@kantarainitiative.org
http://kantarainitiative.org/mailman/listinfo/wg-uma