Editor: Data types misses type: object

[slinkydeveloper]

When I create a new data type (schemas under components), It doesn't add type:object to schema definition

[EricWittmann]

FYI - I've fixed this in the oai-ts-commands library so the next time a release of that is done this will be addressed.

[EricWittmann]

This has been fixed and committed - should be all set for the next release.

[EricWittmann]

Thanks for the error report!

[wiktor-obrebski]

@EricWittmann I see the issue is still here, at least something very similar, for the responses. Shouldn't I be able to choose "object" data type here?

[EricWittmann]

At the moment, apicurio doesn't support inline object definitions. So you would need to create a global data type and then refer to it in the application/json media type in your screenshot. I'd like to support editing an object type inline within the response, but it's not yet done.

[enugentdt]

Any update on this issue? It's the last thing I need before I rewrite all my documentation using this tool :)

[EricWittmann]

Which aspect of this issue do you need? Are you referring to inline object definitions? If so, why are reusable definitions not an acceptable alternative? I'd love to know the use-case so that can influence the priority of the feature.

[wiktor-obrebski]

@EricWittmann

we already have documentation wrote in OpenAPI manually or by other tools that we would like to reuse. inline object definition is common feature, at least I feel like this and it's needed for other tools compatibility.

second problem is that following your advice we fastly have a lot of object definitions that are in real only one-time used definitions. it's make definitions list too long and distracts attention from really useful, commonly used structures in our apis. e.g. instead of have
only User and ShopItem common defs, we ending with many less important types: ResponseXType, ResponseYType, ResponseZType` etc.

[EricWittmann]

OK thanks for the feedback, @psychowico - I'm going to open a new feature request to add better support for inline schemas. I think your reasons for wanting that feature are good. :)

[ThorstenBux]

Just referencing your new feature request in case someone is looking for it: #744