RFC Errata


Errata Search
 
Source of RFC  
Summary Table Full Records

Found 2 records.

Status: Reported (1)

RFC 9457, "Problem Details for HTTP APIs", July 2023

Source of RFC: httpapi (wit)

Errata ID: 8858
Status: Reported
Type: Technical
Publication Format(s) : TEXT, PDF, HTML
Reported By: dylan
Date Reported: 2026-03-28

Section Appendix A says: 

     "title": "An RFC 7807 problem object",

It should say:

     "title": "An RFC 9457 problem object",

Notes:

I suppose this could be either Editorial or Technical, depending on if EID7731 is taken into account or not, but I'm going to lean towards Technical.

Appendix A is correctly describing an RFC 7807 compliant schema, but it is out of context and quite likely in error, given that EID7731 is in Verified status.

The schema is used by various repositories downstream, regardless of the "text of the specification" being superior to the schema, and that can mask RFC 7807 being obsolete.

Status: Held for Document Update (1)

RFC 9457, "Problem Details for HTTP APIs", July 2023

Source of RFC: httpapi (wit)

Errata ID: 7731
Status: Held for Document Update
Type: Editorial
Publication Format(s) : TEXT, PDF, HTML
Reported By: Roman Kovařík
Date Reported: 2023-12-14
Held for Document Update by: Francesca Palombini
Date Held: 2023-12-18

Appendix A says:

# NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792
{
  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
  "title": "An RFC 7807 problem object",
  "type": "object",
  "properties": {
    "type": {
      "type": "string",
      "format": "uri-reference",
      "description": "A URI reference that identifies the \
problem type."
    },
    "title": {
      "type": "string",
      "description": "A short, human-readable summary of the \
problem type."
    },
    "status": {
      "type": "integer",
      "description": "The HTTP status code \
generated by the origin server for this occurrence of the problem.",
      "minimum": 100,
      "maximum": 599
    },
    "detail": {
      "type": "string",
      "description": "A human-readable explanation specific to \
this occurrence of the problem."
    },
    "instance": {
      "type": "string",
      "format": "uri-reference",
      "description": "A URI reference that identifies the \
specific occurrence of the problem. It may or may not yield \
further information if dereferenced."
    }
  }
}

It should say:

# NOTE: '\' line wrapping per RFC 8792
{
  "$schema": "https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/schema",
  "title": "An RFC 7807 problem object",
  "type": "object",
  "properties": {
    "type": {
      "type": "string",
      "format": "uri-reference",
      "description": "A URI reference that identifies the \
problem type."
    },
    "title": {
      "type": "string",
      "description": "A short, human-readable summary of the \
problem type."
    },
    "status": {
      "type": "integer",
      "description": "The HTTP status code \
generated by the origin server for this occurrence of the problem.",
      "minimum": 100,
      "maximum": 599
    },
    "detail": {
      "type": "string",
      "description": "A human-readable explanation specific to \
this occurrence of the problem."
    },
    "instance": {
      "type": "string",
      "format": "uri-reference",
      "description": "A URI reference that identifies the \
specific occurrence of the problem. It may or may not yield \
further information if dereferenced."
    }
  },
  "additionalProperties": true
}

Notes:

The document is correct, however in the example it would have been nice to have "additionalProperties": true explicitly stated.

See: https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/httpapi/fj9TAH6my-kmw7wA_KOlVKCF_V8/

Report New Errata



Advanced Search