Explicit schema references for listing of qualified value or links as inputs/outputs items

[Francis Charette-Migneault]

Using this definition:

ogcapi-processes/openapi/schemas/processes-core/inlineOrRefData.yaml

Lines 1 to 4 in 5066e04

 oneOf: 
   - $ref: "inputValueNoObject.yaml" 
   - $ref: "qualifiedInputValue.yaml" 
   - $ref: "../common-core/link.yaml" 

It is possible to define the following:

outputs:
  inline_value_output: "abc"
  inline_array_output: [1, 2, 3]
  qualified_json_output:
    mediaType: application/json
    value: {"xyz": 123}
  link_output:
    type: application/json
    href: "https://host.com/some.json"

But there is no explicit reference for this kind of structure:

outputs:
  qualified_array_output:
    - mediaType: text/plain
      value: xyz
    - mediaType: application/json
      value: {"abc": 123}
    - type: application/json
      href: "https://host.com/some.json"

Because inputValueNoObject explicitly omits the object type to ensure it is instead embedded within a (qualified) value, that more context (i.e.: with mediaType, schema, etc.) can be provided, and to avoid ambiguous nested-objects schemas, there seems to be an implicit hint that an array of objects/links could also be defined.

While the above qualified value/link array will "work" because of the following schema, the intention is not as clear as for the case of non-array value outputs.

ogcapi-processes/openapi/schemas/processes-core/inputValueNoObject.yaml

Lines 6 to 7 in 5066e04

 - type: array 
   items: {} 

The lack of something more concrete than the "anything" (i.e.: {}) does not help implementers know whether an array of qualified inputs/outputs is a valid construct or not, or rather, whether clients should be able to handle these cases.

Should the schemas be more explicit about his use case?