Dear TOSCA Experts, the specification---TOSCA v1.3 as well as the 2.0 draft---seems to be self-contradicting in the extended notation in policy trigger activity definitions. Taking call_operation as an example: In section 3.6.23.3 Call operation activity definition, the keynames are, all in the same level : call_operation, operation and inputs, with the type of the call_operation defined as “string or empty”. In section 3.6.23.3.2.2 Extended notation, the pseudo-example is: - call_operation: operation: < operation_name > inputs: < parameter_assignments > The operation key is indented with 1 space from the call_operation key, meaning that the value of call_operation is a map (not empty). The following example, which seems to be the logical one, conforms to point 2 above but not to point 1: .. triggers: - some_trigger: event: tosca.interfaces.SomeInterface.some_notification action: - call_operation: operation: SomeInterface.some_operation inputs: some_parameter: some_value .. The following example conforms to point 1 but not to point 2, seems less logical, and is not in line with the other places in the specs where the extended notation idiom is used: .. triggers: - some_trigger: event: tosca.interfaces.SomeInterface.some_notification action: - call_operation: operation: SomeInterface.some_operation inputs: some_parameter: some_value .. Besides call_operation, the same issue is present for the delegate and set_state activities. Which one of the above two examples are to be considered as compliant with the specification? Kind regards, Gábor