-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 347
Validation: Add "propertyNames" keyword #172
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
Validation: Add "propertyNames" keyword #172
Conversation
3280742 to
f1a7b77
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
You need to add this to the hyper-schema meta-schema as well, plus we need to see how #171 plays out.
Aside from that this looks good to me as long as @epoberezkin approves since it was his issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Same objection to this language as in PR #171, so this should be adjusted based on the resolution of that PR.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can say "A missing keyword exhibits the same behavior as an empty schema" or something like that... The thing is it has to be informative, since it's noting something that's already true.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
f1a7b77 to
40646a6
Compare
I just removed the paragraph, we can figure out what to do in #171 regarding "default" language
at least something useful from me, not just the stream of disruption ;)
Language for #70