Skip to content

Standardize format of meta-schemas. #186

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

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 12, 2016

Conversation

handrews
Copy link
Contributor

This brings formatting and most of the initial field ordering
in line with the Draft 05 meta-schemas proposed in the web site
repo.

Also ensure that hyper-schema's definition of "schemaArray"
cannot get out of sync with schema's, and add the link schema.

@handrews
Copy link
Contributor Author

@awwright This does not have any actual changes beyond formatting, please review and merge ASAP.

This brings formatting and most of the initial field ordering
in line with the Draft 05 meta-schemas proposed in the web site
repo.

Also ensure that hyper-schema's definition of "schemaArray"
cannot get out of sync with schema's, and add the link schema.
Copy link
Member

@Relequestual Relequestual left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Few questions. After which I'll be happy to merge.

@@ -66,17 +64,26 @@
"type": "string"
}
}
},
"readOnly": {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I can see readOnly in draft-5 (aka latest), so am happy with this.

@@ -0,0 +1,42 @@
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft/hyper-schema#",
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

When the draft 4 version had the URI of draft-4/hyper-schema, why do we not use the URI of draft-5/hyper-schema? (Or will that be a later PR?)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Because this is for "master" so it's not a numbered draft (at least that's how @awwright set it up and I was trying to not change it- take a look at the "id" of the hyper-schema).

"id": "http://json-schema.org/draft/links#",
"title": "Link Description Object",
"type": "object",
"required": [ "href" ],
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

draft 4 version at https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-org.github.io/blob/master/draft-04/links#L6 includes "rel" as required. Was this changed in draft 4? (Just checking)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

No, it was changed in draft 5. I made those changes later in the sequence for hyper-schema.json but forgot to "backport" links.json to a draft-4-compatible state. I just pulled it over as-is from the draft 5 changes I made on the website. I can change it if preferred.

@Relequestual
Copy link
Member

As this doesn't change anything functionally, I see no reason to daley merging, which will enable further PRs.

@Relequestual Relequestual merged commit 25e545d into json-schema-org:master Dec 12, 2016
@handrews handrews deleted the meta1 branch December 12, 2016 17:21
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants