Skip to content

Allow non canonical values for Enums - #106

Merged
azmeuk merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
34-no-canonical-values
Aug 25, 2026
Merged

Allow non canonical values for Enums#106
azmeuk merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
34-no-canonical-values

Conversation

@azmeuk

@azmeuk azmeuk commented Aug 8, 2025

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Fixes #34

@azmeuk azmeuk added the bug Something isn't working label Aug 8, 2025
@azmeuk
azmeuk force-pushed the 34-no-canonical-values branch 3 times, most recently from e546026 to 14e7bc4 Compare August 8, 2025 21:10
RFC7643 §2.3.1 only allows service providers to restrict string attributes
to their canonicalValues, so attributes suggesting canonical values now keep
arbitrary values instead of rejecting them. This covers the type attribute
of Email, PhoneNumber, Im, Photo, Address and AuthenticationScheme.

Canonical values are matched case-insensitively, as §2.2 makes those
attributes case-insensitive, and their JSON schema advertises the canonical
values as examples instead of a restrictive enum.
@azmeuk
azmeuk force-pushed the 34-no-canonical-values branch from 14e7bc4 to f838368 Compare August 25, 2026 20:42
@azmeuk
azmeuk merged commit b6607ca into main Aug 25, 2026
21 of 25 checks passed
@azmeuk
azmeuk deleted the 34-no-canonical-values branch August 25, 2026 20:48
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

bug Something isn't working

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Do not restrict to canonical values

1 participant