Add definition for Operation to spec 3.0

[buehlefs]

Since version 3 elevates operations to a top level component (and spec v3 Operations have a different semantic compared to 2.x) they should have a dedicated definition in the definitions section. (Additionally, operations could also be added to the concepts)

I do not have a fleshed out proposal yet (I may create a PR if I find the time to do so), so feel free to propose a definition or create a PR.

Suggested starting point:

An operation describes a specific action an application can take to interact with the async api.
Operations are performed by sending (or receiving) messages to (or from) channels.

Related Issues:

• Provide definition for the reply #980
• Proposal to solve publish/subscribe confusion #618 Issue about the changes of operations

[github-actions]

Welcome to AsyncAPI. Thanks a lot for reporting your first issue. Please check out our contributors guide and the instructions about a basic recommended setup useful for opening a pull request.
Keep in mind there are also other channels you can use to interact with AsyncAPI community. For more details check out this issue.

[derberg]

Hey, yes, you're right, we need it. I think your text is ok.

@smoya @fmvilas @char0n @dalelane thoughts?

[char0n]

Yes, good idea

@buehlefs Operation description is good start and is using working already present in AsyncAPI 3.0.0 spec.

An operation describes a specific action an application can take to interact with the async api.
Operations are performed by sending (or receiving) messages to (or from) channels.

There is a mention of async api - we have to address this as it's a bit ambiguous and is not clear what does it actually mean.
I would suggest the following change which is compatible with the existing AsyncAPI 3.0.0 wording:

An operation describes a specific action an application can take to interact with the message-driven APIs.
Operations are performed by sending (or receiving) messages to (or from) channels.

[github-actions]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity 😴

It will be closed in 120 days if no further activity occurs. To unstale this issue, add a comment with a detailed explanation.

There can be many reasons why some specific issue has no activity. The most probable cause is lack of time, not lack of interest. AsyncAPI Initiative is a Linux Foundation project not owned by a single for-profit company. It is a community-driven initiative ruled under open governance model.

Let us figure out together how to push this issue forward. Connect with us through one of many communication channels we established here.

Thank you for your patience ❤️