RAML 1.0 is around the corner


#1

It’s time to finalize the list of candidates for RAML 1.0 and declare the 1.0 spec done. We’ve pulled together lots of disparate discussions into a list of candidates on github, and there’s a longer blog entry describing all this. Please join us in a vigorous final conversation before we nail down the spec and get to implementing.


#2

This topic is now pinned. It will appear at the top of its category until it is either unpinned by a moderator, or the Clear Pin button is pressed.


#3

Any updates on timelines…when this will be finalized, tested, etc?


#4

Hi guys,

I know that this stand still for quite a long time - but to drag that out again and move forward, could everyone please review the candidates again and make comments. If there is anything not in the list, please post it here.

Thanks,
Christian


#5

Thank you for getting back to us on this. I’ll review again in the next few days and post any thoughts. Is there another channel/thread that we should do so in, or is this fine here?


#6

This one is fine for a general discussion. If you have comments to specific candidates, please comment on the issues.


#7

Someone else brought up the concept of adding relations ( as a parameter in RAML) that could then be used to build links and such as necessary. Any thoughts/forward direction on that to support HATEOAS based API modeling?


#8

Is RAML 1.0 abandoned? It seems like there has been no activity for almost a year. In our evaluation of RAML, we prefer the design and approach over swagger, but some critical features planned for 1.0 are required before we can switch from swagger. Please update us on the timeline and 1.0 roadmap.


#9

We’ve put together the various candidates into a coherent approach that we plan to publish by the end of this month (yes, 9 days from now) as a final draft, and plan to aggressively get final feedback and “make it so” by the end of next month October.

And BTW it will come with some pretty cool tooling, not just parsers, that validate it all hangs together…


#10

@llaakes what features are you specifically looking for?


#11

As a newcomer, determining the state of RAML is quite difficult. I see the list of issues marked for the v1.0 milestone, but that’s a substantial list. References to a “new type system” certainly suggest there’s a lot of work going on somewhere.

Is there a draft of the RAML 1.0 specification available somewhere, and are any tools preparing to deal with this new version in the immediate future?

I’m trying to determine if it makes sense to use RAML in my organization. If the spec and some tools will be at 1.0 in the near future, it would be relatively easy to consider, even if not all tools are in place.

Thanks!

-Fred


#12

Indeed, we will have them ready by the end of this month, both spec and tools.


#13

Most of the tools I’m interested in are third-party contributions, but I’m definitely looking forward to the updated spec. Will a draft be available before then so API developers can start to prepare?


#14

Hi, have you seen this blog post? http://blog.raml.org/raml-1-0-final-candidate/

It has a draft right in the end of it. Let me know if that is what you were looking for.


#15

The example is nice to have, and the prose describes wonderful things. What I was hoping to find was a draft of the updated RAML specification itself, not an example API documented using RAML.

I’ll note that the example does look like it’ll be a move in the right direction for my organization, and will make it easier for small groups without an existing investment in XSD or JSON Schema to pick up RAML and apply it usefully.


#16

You would need to wait until the end of this month I am afraid.


#17

http://blog.raml.org/raml-1-0-is-here/

http://raml.org

http://docs.raml.org/specs/1.0/


#18