Update the test schema: add test ID, add descriptions, refactor

[ssilverman]

Closes #53

[karenetheridge]

Is this adding more detail to the schema to define structure that was already there, or is this adding/changing structure?

[ssilverman]

@karenetheridge I updated this PR to use more than one commit so the progression is more clear. Basically, the only major change is that it adds "id" to "tests" and to "test". Also, there's some refactoring so that the schema is cleaner and easier to read. Otherwise, there's no other structural change. Let me know if you want me to squash back into a single commit.

Note that I also fixed an error where there was only one "id" and in the wrong spot.

[ssilverman]

When I first made this PR, I was going to change it to draft-2019-09 because it just seemed like the right thing to do (also #238 mentions it). But then I reasoned that since a draft-04-only schema validator implementor might still need the test schema in draft-04 form, and that newer implementors might have support for the older drafts (thinking that's a bad assumption, though). So then I left it at draft-04. Thoughts?

[karenetheridge]

Thanks, the broken-out commits make it all clear!
I really like the idea of having unique ids on test groups and individual tests -- this will make it easier for wrapper scripts to allow running just a subset of tests reliably (presently they need to key off of the filename and test names, which can change over time).

[karenetheridge]

Unless a later draft is needed for some piece of syntax (doubtful given that this structure is simple), I'd lean towards sticking to draft 4 for now, as it's the most likely to be implemented, and can let a user bootstrap into testing later spec versions. I do not feel strongly about it though (and I'm just the peanut gallery here anyway).

[ssilverman]

Thanks for your thoughts. I'll wait for an "approve" and then commit it.

[Julian]

lgtm thanks -- let's just be careful with adding the IDs -- I'd like to do so incrementally so that we don't end up doing large (automated) changes to the whole suite at once, since I can't really review them easily. Would prefer we incrementally add IDs to new tests, and then in smaller PRs go back and add them to existing ones.

[Julian]

@karenetheridge your opinion very much counts!