Additional formats as discussed in #607

[ralfhandl]

Additional formats as discussed in #607

[darrelmiller]

I think these additional formats would be valuable additions to a "format registry" that indicates commonly used formats. I'm not convinced that all of these formats should be defined in the specification. This would require all tooling to support all of the formats and I suspect many would not be.

[ralfhandl]

I'm not convinced that all of these formats should be defined in the specification.

Which are the new ones that CAN be defined in the specification?

Given that there's no "format registry" and the Swagger/OpenAPI specification seems to be the only official document that defines formats beyond the rather rudimentary list in http://json-schema.org/latest/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7.3, I'll happily settle for any non-empty subset of the new formats.

[webron]

@ralfhandl - thanks for the PR. The @OAI/tdc has discussed the issued and decided that we don't feel the extended format descriptions should be in the spec.

However, there's an understandable need to define such additional formats and we've considered two alternative approaches. These will be handled in #845.