Skip to content

test the format-assertion vocabulary with a custom metaschema #519

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
Sep 28, 2021

Conversation

karenetheridge
Copy link
Member

This is our very first test using a custom metaschema. Luckily, since format-assertion is not enabled in the default metaschema, we can enable it here and use it to test the effectiveness of the $schema and $vocabulary keywords.

@karenetheridge karenetheridge requested a review from a team September 26, 2021 23:08
Comment on lines +16 to +18
"description": "format-assertion: false: invalid string",
"data": "not-an-ipv4",
"valid": false
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The results for this test depend on whether the implementation supports the format-assertion vocabulary or not. That's fine considering that this is in "optional", but it might be nice to have a $comment or something that this is the expected result for an implementation that does support the format-assertion vocabulary. Implementations that don't support format-assertion will not error, but will return different result.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

we should probably do that for everything in optional/... I think there's an old issue asking for an expanded README too.

Maybe after the conference is done we can have some discussions about how to improve the layout of the test suite?

@karenetheridge karenetheridge merged commit 8891d81 into master Sep 28, 2021
@karenetheridge karenetheridge deleted the ether/custom-dialect branch September 28, 2021 22:52
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.

4 participants