Team 2: Homework: review Pet object

[edwinvandenbelt]

Pet:
  type: object
  description: >-
    An animal accompanying a traveller. Subtype of Transportable.
  allOf:
    - $ref: '#/components/schemas/Transportable'
  x-semantics:
    transmodel: unmapped
    osdm: TransportableSpecification (PET / DOG)
    tomp: travellerRequirements.prmNeeds.encumbranceNeed (other_animal / guide_dog)
    bob: unmapped
    omsa: unmapped
    ferrygateway: PetsType / PetType
  x-todo: Guide and assistance dogs are modelled separately via TravellerRequirements.prmNeeds (accompanyingDog).
  required:
    - type
  properties:
    type:
      type: string
      description: Category of the pet.
      enum:
        - smallDog
        - largeDog
        - cat
        - other
      x-todo: enum, x-enum or lookup
      x-semantics:
        transmodel: unmapped
        osdm: TransportableSpecification.TransportableType (PET, DOG)
        tomp: travellerRequirements.prmNeeds.encumbranceNeed (other_animal)
        bob: unmapped
        omsa: unmapped
        ferrygateway: PetCategoryType (SmallDog, BigDog, Cat, Other)
    isCompanion:
      type: boolean
      description: >-
        Indicates whether this pet is a companion animal.
      x-todo: boolean, enum, x-enum? And should it refer to an anonymous traveller (by ref?)
        this is of course not relevant if companion dogs are enlisted as a PRM need.
      x-semantics:
        transmodel: unmapped
        osdm: unmapped
        tomp: unmapped
        bob: unmapped
        omsa: unmapped
        ferrygateway: unmapped

[Ulf9]

Should we not clearly exclude companion dogs from being "Pets". I would say they should not be listed as "Pets", but that they could possibly be mentioned as an attribute in PRM-section .

[edwinvandenbelt]

Indeed, 2 ways to do this. Having a companion dog within the 'pets' collection has the advantage of knowing how many places can be occupied/room claimed. It might be a bit less intuitive to put them in the PRM section, but it has it's advantages.