v3.1: Should we change the "?" in the style example table (again)?

[handrews]

In 3.1.1 we added the ? because it matched RFC6570 library behavior, but explained that sometimes you need to strip it. This is awkward, because the table is showing individual parameters, and of course not all of them have a ?! The leading ? and intermediate & characters need to be sorted out when composing the whole query string. And in request bodies, there is no leading ? at all.

In PR #4647 for 3.2, with the new example fields, we have removed the ? and changed the wording to explain when to add the ? back. This allows matching the style example table to the Example Object fields.

Should we make a similar change for 3.1.2, or leave it as-is? Technically, we might only need to be a bit more clear about the reason the ? is shown in 3.1.2, since we do discuss stripping it.

See also:

• v3.1+: Should new guidance be given for example and the Example Object's value and externalValue? #4659

[handrews]

Addressed for 3.2 in PR #4673, 3.1.x still TBD