Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CI for meta-schemas #618

Closed
handrews opened this issue Jun 21, 2018 · 2 comments
Closed

CI for meta-schemas #618

handrews opened this issue Jun 21, 2018 · 2 comments
Labels
administrative clarification Items that need to be clarified in the specification Priority: High
Milestone

Comments

@handrews
Copy link
Contributor

Our quality levels on the meta-schemas have been unacceptable (and I'm the one who has made most of the meta-schema changes, so I'm primarily criticizing myself here, although the problem extends back before my time on the project).

Bugs found (by various people) since I've been involved:

draft-03:

  • missing comma in hyper-schema.json. it wouldn't even parse- apparently no one ever used it

draft-04:

  • format entirely missing
  • readOnly entirely missing
  • the whole confusion over what "format": "uri" meant, causing it to be used incorrectly
  • still using "format": "regex" despite it having been removed from draft-04 (we decided not to fix this, it applies to draft-06 as well)

draft-06:

  • readOnly's default set to the string "false" instead of boolean false
  • propertyNames schema wrong (should be object of schemas, not a single schema)
  • contains entirely missing

draft-07:

  • propertyNames schema wrong

We should set up a test suite for the meta-schemas and require that meta-schema changes, including test suite changes, accompany spec changes. This should be done before shipping draft-08. The draft-08 keyword unevaluatedProperties will make it much easier to check for misspelled properties.

@Julian
Copy link
Member

Julian commented Feb 24, 2019

Presumably this is also a duplicate of json-schema-org/JSON-Schema-Test-Suite#244 (for which there are a small number of existing ones in my implementation) but I haven't gotten a chance to actually sit down and move them.

@gregsdennis
Copy link
Member

Closing as complete based on ☝️

@gregsdennis gregsdennis added clarification Items that need to be clarified in the specification and removed Type: Bug labels Jul 17, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
administrative clarification Items that need to be clarified in the specification Priority: High
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants