From b727c257b4aaf4025eec03768c0209f063912445 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Karen Etheridge Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2026 11:08:45 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] fix reference to "undefined" in RFC6570 --- src/oas.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/src/oas.md b/src/oas.md index 0bcfe7387d..5f84dc1d40 100644 --- a/src/oas.md +++ b/src/oas.md @@ -4911,7 +4911,7 @@ parameters: type: string ``` -This example is equivalent to RFC6570's `{?foo*,bar}`, and **NOT** `{?foo*}{&bar}`. The latter is problematic because if `foo` is not defined (see [RFC6570 §3.2](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6570#section-3.2) for details on what is considered undefined), the result will be an invalid URI. +This example is equivalent to RFC6570's `{?foo*,bar}`, and **NOT** `{?foo*}{&bar}`. The latter is problematic because if `foo` is not defined (see [RFC6570 §2.3](https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6570#section-2.3) for details on what is considered undefined), the result will be an invalid URI. The `&` prefix operator has no equivalent in the Parameter Object. Note that RFC6570 does not specify behavior for compound values beyond the single level addressed by `explode`. The result of using objects or arrays where no behavior is clearly specified for them is implementation-defined.