[Form Recognizer v2.1] Updating Gender and Country fields following CELA

[TFR258]

review

MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.

Changelog

Please ensure to add changelog with this PR by answering the following questions.

1. What's the purpose of the update?
   • new service onboarding
   • new API version
   • update existing version for new feature
   • update existing version to fix swagger quality issue in s360
   • Other, please clarify
2. When you are targeting to deploy new service/feature to public regions? Please provide date, or month to public if date is not available yet.
3. When you expect to publish swagger? Please provide date, or month to public if date is not available yet.
4. If it's an update to existing version, please select SDKs of specific language and CLIs that require refresh after swagger is published.
   • SDK of .NET (need service team to ensure code readiness)
   • SDK of Python
   • SDK of Java
   • SDK of Js
   • SDK of Go
   • PowerShell
   • CLI
   • Terraform
   • No, no need to refresh for updates in this PR

Contribution checklist:

• I commit to follow the Breaking Change Policy of "no breaking changes"
• I have reviewed the documentation for the workflow.
• Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and errors have all been fixed in this PR. How to fix?

If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.

ARM API Review Checklist

• Ensure to check this box if one of the following scenarios meet updates in the PR, so that label “WaitForARMFeedback” will be added automatically to involve ARM API Review. Failure to comply may result in delays for manifest application. Note this does not apply to data plane APIs, all “removals” and “adding a new property” no more require ARM API review.

  • Adding new API(s)
  • Adding a new API version
  • Ensure to copy the existing version into new directory structure for first commit (including refactoring) and then push new changes including version updates in separate commits. This is required to review the changes efficiently.
  • Adding a new service

• Please ensure you've reviewed following guidelines including ARM resource provider contract and REST guidelines. Estimated time (4 hours). This is required before you can request review from ARM API Review board.

• If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged with urgency, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.

Breaking Change Review Checklist

If there are following updates in the PR, ensure to request an approval from Breaking Change Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.

• Removing API(s) in stable version
• Removing properties in stable version
• Removing API version(s) in stable version
• Updating API in stable or public preview version with Breaking Change Validation errors
• Updating API(s) in public preview over 1 year (refer to Retirement of Previews)

Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.

Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.

[openapi-workflow-bot]

Hi, @TFR258 Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips.

Please ensure to do self-check against checklists in first PR comment.

PR assignee is the person auto-assigned and responsible for your current PR reviewing and merging.

For specs comparison cross API versions, Use API Specs Comparison Report Generator

If there is CI failure(s), to fix CI error(s) is mandatory for PR merging; or you need to provide justification in PR comment for explanation. How to fix?

Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. vsswagger@microsoft.com

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Swagger Validation Report

️❌BreakingChange: 4 Errors, 0 Warnings failed [Detail]

• Compared Swaggers (Based on Oad v0.8.9)
  • original: stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json <---> new: stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json

Rule	Message
❌ 1020 - AddedEnumValue	The new version is adding enum value(s) 'countryRegion' from the old version. New: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L2036:9 Old: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L2036:9
❌ 1033 - RemovedProperty	The new version is missing a property found in the old version. Was 'valueGender' renamed or removed? New: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L2035:7 Old: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L2035:7
❌ 1033 - RemovedProperty	The new version is missing a property found in the old version. Was 'valueCountry' renamed or removed? New: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L2035:7 Old: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L2035:7
❌ 1041 - AddedPropertyInResponse	The new version has a new property 'valueCountryRegion' in response that was not found in the old version. New: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L2035:7 Old: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L2035:7

️⚠️LintDiff: 0 Warnings warning [Detail]

• Linted configuring files (Based on source branch, openapi-validator v1.9.2 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.6 )
  • data-plane/FormRecognizer/readme.md tag:release_2_1
• Linted configuring files (Based on target branch, openapi-validator v1.9.2 , classic-openapi-validator v1.1.6 )
  • data-plane/FormRecognizer/readme.md tag:release_2_1

The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

Rule	Message
⚠️ R2018 - XmsEnumValidation	The enum types should have x-ms-enum type extension set with appropriate options. Property name: state Location: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L1871
⚠️ R2018 - XmsEnumValidation	The enum types should have x-ms-enum type extension set with appropriate options. Property name: valueSelectionMark Location: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L2084
⚠️ R3017 - GuidUsage	Guid used in model definition 'CopyResult' for property 'modelId'. Usage of Guid is not recommanded. If GUIDs are absolutely required in your service, please get sign off from the Azure API review board. Location: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L1167
⚠️ R3017 - GuidUsage	Guid used in model definition 'TrainResult' for property 'modelId'. Usage of Guid is not recommanded. If GUIDs are absolutely required in your service, please get sign off from the Azure API review board. Location: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L1288
⚠️ R3017 - GuidUsage	Guid used in model definition 'ModelInfo' for property 'modelId'. Usage of Guid is not recommanded. If GUIDs are absolutely required in your service, please get sign off from the Azure API review board. Location: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L1337
⚠️ R3017 - GuidUsage	Guid used in model definition 'DocumentResult' for property 'modelId'. Usage of Guid is not recommanded. If GUIDs are absolutely required in your service, please get sign off from the Azure API review board. Location: FormRecognizer/stable/v2.1/FormRecognizer.json#L1999

️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for Avocado.

️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for ModelValidation.

️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for SemanticValidation.

️️✔️Cross Version BreakingChange (Base on preview version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

️️✔️Cross Version BreakingChange (Base on stable version) succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There are no breaking changes.

️️✔️CredScan succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

There is no credential detected.

️️✔️[Staging] SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation

• The following tags are being changed in this PR
• cognitiveservices/data-plane/FormRecognizer/readme.md#release_2_1

The following errors/warnings are introduced by current PR:

|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"cognitiveservices/data-plane/FormRecognizer/readme.md",
"tag":"release_2_1",
"details":"> Installing AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0)"|
|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"cognitiveservices/data-plane/FormRecognizer/readme.md",
"tag":"release_2_1",
"details":"> Installed AutoRest extension '@microsoft.azure/openapi-validator' (1.8.0->1.8.0)"|

The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:

|:speech_balloon: AutorestCore/Exception|"readme":"cognitiveservices/data-plane/FormRecognizer/readme.md",
"tag":"release_2_1",
"details":"> Loading AutoRest extension '@autorest/modelerfour' (4.15.456->4.15.456)"|

️️✔️[Staging] PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for PrettierCheck.

️️✔️[Staging] SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

Validation passes for SpellCheck.

_{Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?}

[openapi-workflow-bot]

[Call for Action] To better understand Azure service dev/test scenario, and support Azure service developer better on Swagger and REST API related tests in early phase, please help to fill in with this survey https://aka.ms/SurveyForEarlyPhase. It will take 5 to 10 minutes. If you already complete survey, please neglect this comment. Thanks.

[openapi-pipeline-app]

Swagger Generation Artifacts

️️✔️ azure-sdk-for-go succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

• ️✔️Succeeded [Logs]Release - Generate from 7043b48. SDK Automation 14.0.0

  command	sh ./initScript.sh ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/initInput.json ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/initOutput.json
  command	go run ./tools/generator/main.go ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/generateInput.json ../../../../../azure-sdk-for-go_tmp/generateOutput.json

• ️✔️preview/cognitiveservices/v1.0/formrecognizer [View full logs]  [Release SDK Changes]

  info	[Changelog] No exported changes

️⚠️ azure-sdk-for-java warning [Detail]

• ⚠️Warning [Logs]Release - Generate from 7043b48. SDK Automation 14.0.0

  command	./eng/mgmt/automation/init.sh ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/initInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/initOutput.json
  command	./eng/mgmt/automation/generate.py ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/generateInput.json ../azure-sdk-for-java_tmp/generateOutput.json
  cmderr	[generate.py] 2021-05-07 20:06:45 ERROR [Skip] readme path does not format as specification/*/resource-manager/readme.md
  warn	No file changes detected after generation
  warn	No package detected after generation

️️✔️[Staging] ApiDocPreview succeeded [Detail] [Expand]

 Please click here to preview with your @microsoft account. 

_{Posted by Swagger Pipeline | How to fix these errors?}

[openapi-workflow-bot]

NewApiVersionRequired reason:

A service’s API is a contract with customers and is represented by using the api-version query parameter. Changes such as adding an optional property to a request/response or introducing a new operation is a change to the service’s contract and therefore requires a new api-version value. This is critically important for documentation, client libraries, and customer support.

EXAMPLE: if a customer calls a service in the public cloud using api-version=2020-07-27, the new property or operation may exist but if they call the service in a government cloud, air-gapped cloud, or Azure Stack Hub cloud using the same api-version, the property or operation may not exist. Because there is no clear relationship between the service api-version and the new property/operation, customers can’t trust the documentation and Azure customer have difficulty helping customers diagnose issues. In addition, each client library version documents the service version it supports. When an optional property or new operation is added to a service and its Swagger, new client libraries must be produced to expose this functionality to customers. Without updating the api-version, it is unclear to customers which version of a client library supports these new features.

[openapi-workflow-bot]

Hi @TFR258, one or multiple breaking change(s) is detected in your PR. Please check out the breaking change(s), and provide business justification in the PR comment and @ PR assignee why you must have these change(s), and how external customer impact can be mitigated. Please ensure to follow breaking change policy to request breaking change review and approval before proceeding swagger PR review.
Action: To initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.
If you want to know the production traffic statistic, please see ARM Traffic statistic.
If you think it is false positive breaking change, please provide the reasons in the PR comment, report to Swagger Tooling Team via https://aka.ms/swaggerfeedback.

[maririos]

Hi @TFR258 . Do you expect this PR to have more changes and that is why it is still in draft mode?

[johanste]

@JeffreyRichter, fyi, marked this as "breaking change approved" since a) the service hasn't deployed the GA version yet and b) the changes are made for compliance reasons.