Any idea towards what direction the solution is leaning? Op 21 nov. 2016, om 20:26 heeft tony tam <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> het volgende geschreven:
It was too much to ask several years ago when the project was still young. With 3.0 there is a chance we will have this. On Nov 21, 2016, at 11:25 AM, Alexander Henket <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: That is disappointing. Was standardizing that ever considered? Op 21 nov. 2016, om 20:22 heeft tony tam <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> het volgende geschreven: No, it’s a matter of convention not policy how and where a swagger definition is located. On Nov 21, 2016, at 11:21 AM, Alexander Henket <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Is there a defined way to find out of service X has a Swagger definition available? E.g. HTTP OPTIONS, a defined endpoint call, a GET with Accept: application/xml+swagger or any other method? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Swagger" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "Swagger" group. To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/swagger-swaggersocket/rT-FTHU-1RI/unsubscribe. To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Swagger" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
