Skip to content

[25] Add an "Optional Tests" section to the README #345

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

[25] Add an "Optional Tests" section to the README #345

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
51 changes: 51 additions & 0 deletions README.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -65,6 +65,57 @@ widely used, while draft-03 is long since deprecated.
If you see anything missing from the current supported drafts, or incorrect
on any draft still accepting bug fixes, please file an issue or submit a PR.

Optional Tests
--------------

Tests in the `optional/` directory test optional validation behavior. Validators
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thanks! I was hoping to even say a bit about each of the files present here -- e.g. a list of each file we have, and an explanation/link to why it's optional (e.g., for zeroTerminatedFloats.json, it's for languages that do not have floating point types. For format, it's because it being a validation keyword rather than informative is optional, etc.

This way there's a short sentence about each and a list of why they're not required.

Does that make sense?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Could this be put into the test data itself, either in the 'description' field or in an additional 'comment' field?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Decent sounding idea to me.

only need to execute tests for implemented features.

There are different sets of optional features for each draft. They are
summarized below.

1. Arbitrary-precision number support: JSON allows numbers of
arbitrary precision.\
See: [6. Numbers](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8259#section-6)\
Also see:
* 2019-09: [4.2. Validation of Numeric Instances](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.4.2)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's going to be a bit of a pain in the butt to maintain this as new versions come out (since each time that happens we'll have to go find the relevant new section in that draft).

But such is life I suppose, I don't have a better suggestion.

* 7: [4.2. Validation of Numeric Instances](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01#section-4.2)
* 6: [3.2. Validation of numeric instances](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01#section-3.2)
* 4: [3.2. Validation of numeric instances](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00#section-3.2)
* 3: No link
2. Encoded content in a string: The `"contentMediaType"` property is optional.\
See:
* 2019-09: [8.4. contentMediaType](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.8.4)
* 7: [8.4. contentMediaType](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01#section-8.4)
3. ECMA 262 regex quirks.\
See:
* 2019-09: [6.4. Regular Expressions](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.6.4)
* 7: [4.3. Regular Expressions](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01#section-4.3)
* 6: [3.3. Regular expressions](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01#section-3.3)
* 4: [3.3. Regular expressions](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00#section-3.3)
* 3: https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-03 (look for the term
"regular expression")
4. References to unknown keywords: These may optionally be processed.\
See:
* 2019-09: [6.5. Extending JSON Schema](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.6.5)
* 7: [6.4. Extending JSON Schema](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-01#section-6.4)
* 6: [6.4. Extending JSON Schema](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-01#section-6.4)
* 4: [5.6. Extending JSON Schema](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-04#section-5.6)
* 3: [5.4. additionalProperties](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-03#section-5.4)
5. Numbers having zero-valued fractional parts are integers: In the JSON data
model, there is no distinction made between integers and arbitrary numbers.
Some parsers, however, may not support floating-point, or even choose to
make a distinction between integers and numbers having a zero-valued
fractional part.\
See: [6. Numbers](https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc8259#section-6)
6. All the defined "format" values.\
See:
* 2019-09: [7. A Vocabulary for Semantic Content With "format"](https://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.7)
* 7: [7. Semantic Validation With "format"](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-handrews-json-schema-validation-01#section-7)
* 6: [8. Semantic validation with "format"](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wright-json-schema-validation-01#section-8)
* 4: [7. Semantic validation with "format"](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-fge-json-schema-validation-00#section-7)
* 3: [5.23. format](https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-zyp-json-schema-03#section-5.23)

Who Uses the Test Suite
-----------------------

Expand Down