Subject: Re: [scim] Expected behavior for null JSON values

From: "Schooler,Corey" <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 5 Oct 2016 22:01:13 +0000

Would the same be true of supplying an empty String as the value?

On September 23, 2016 at 3:59:44 PM, Shelley ([email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>) wrote:

PATCH is a little bit different since it represents only a partial resource, so a consumer might think that explicitly providing null for an attribute will actually set the attribute to null (whereas with a full resource representation in POST/PUT, a null attribute is essentially the same thing as not providing the attribute).

Despite this ambiguity, for simplicity/consistency across all methods (POST/PUT/PATCH), and in alignment with the purpose of the meta.attributes, my vote is to ignore missing/null attributes for PATCH.

On Fri, Sep 23, 2016 at 2:35 PM, Phil Hunt <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:
+ 1

This kind of unspecified stuff was some of the shortcomings of 1.1 that made interop hard.

You really have to test major implementers to see what they do from a defacto perspective.

Also, when it comes to “PUT” you may find similar issues.  What does a missing attribute or null attribute mean?

Phil

@independentid
www.independentid.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.independentid.com&d=DQMFaQ&c=NRtzTzKNaCCmhN_9N2YJR-XrNU1huIgYP99yDsEzaJo&r=S9VY-8ZOiVGtDJ_-BDgjVF_HyHltHYQkYSvdHDPFrJs&m=4U_o3DpmiLCTahNtJ3NPx3hZNRkZOZbj0vLqP7RrST0&s=x-hrDxVa_Lv-JPjanEPcn7t_vUrAUiSbn8Y32YVkbnM&e=>
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>

On Sep 23, 2016, at 12:08 PM, Shelley <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

I'd propose that Service Providers should simply ignore null attributes in PATCH requests. Attributes should only be removed via the meta.attributes attribute.

On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 10:42 AM, Schooler,Corey <[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>> wrote:

I was looking for guidance on how a v1.1 Service Provider should handle null values provided within the json for a PATCH request.

Example:
{
  "schemas": ["urn:scim:schemas:core:1.0"],
  "displayName": null
}

Should the “displayName" attribute be ignored or should it be treated the same as if “displayName" was supplied in “meta.attributes"?
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE This message and any included attachments are from Cerner Corporation and are intended only for the addressee. The information contained in this message is confidential and may constitute inside or non-public information under international, federal, or state securities laws. Unauthorized forwarding, printing, copying, distribution, or use of such information is strictly prohibited and may be unlawful. If you are not the addressee, please promptly delete this message and notify the sender of the delivery error by e-mail or you may call Cerner's corporate offices in Kansas City, Missouri, U.S.A at (+1) (816)221-1024<tel:%28%2B1%29%20%28816%29221-1024>.

_______________________________________________
scim mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_scim&d=DQMFaQ&c=NRtzTzKNaCCmhN_9N2YJR-XrNU1huIgYP99yDsEzaJo&r=S9VY-8ZOiVGtDJ_-BDgjVF_HyHltHYQkYSvdHDPFrJs&m=4U_o3DpmiLCTahNtJ3NPx3hZNRkZOZbj0vLqP7RrST0&s=4QwxYUQhPGQp8KnSVA2h_Et8Rj7u9k3oth7jKGmwPZM&e=>

_______________________________________________
scim mailing list
[email-masked]<mailto:[email-masked]>
https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/scim<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_scim&d=DQMFaQ&c=NRtzTzKNaCCmhN_9N2YJR-XrNU1huIgYP99yDsEzaJo&r=S9VY-8ZOiVGtDJ_-BDgjVF_HyHltHYQkYSvdHDPFrJs&m=4U_o3DpmiLCTahNtJ3NPx3hZNRkZOZbj0vLqP7RrST0&s=4QwxYUQhPGQp8KnSVA2h_Et8Rj7u9k3oth7jKGmwPZM&e=>