Skip to content

Allow contains to apply to objects as well as arrays #1092

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

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jun 4, 2021
Merged

Allow contains to apply to objects as well as arrays #1092

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
abc7e48
Allow contains to apply to objects as well as arrays
jdesrosiers Apr 19, 2021
46de499
Move contains to "other" applicator section
jdesrosiers Apr 20, 2021
dcd4d2e
Clarify that "length" applies to objects as well as arrays
jdesrosiers Apr 20, 2021
58e4264
Add change log for bhutton-next
jdesrosiers May 14, 2021
e6519ba
Add to change log "contains" applies to objects
jdesrosiers May 14, 2021
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
24 changes: 16 additions & 8 deletions jsonschema-core.xml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2342,18 +2342,26 @@
been found, in order to collect annotations for use by other keywords.
This is to ensure that all possible annotations are collected.
</t>
<t>
An object instance is valid against "contains" if at least one of
its property values is valid against the given schema. The subschema
MUST be applied to every property value even after the first match has
been found, in order to collect annotations for use by other keywords.
This is to ensure that all possible annotations are collected.
</t>
<t>
Logically, the validation result of applying the value subschema to each
item in the array MUST be ORed with "false", resulting in an overall
validation result.
item in the array or property in the object MUST be ORed with "false",
resulting in an overall validation result.
</t>
<t>
This keyword produces an annotation value which is an array of
the indexes to which this keyword validates successfully when applying
its subschema, in ascending order. The value MAY be a boolean "true" if
the subschema validates successfully when applied to every index of the
instance. The annotation MUST be present if the instance array to which
this keyword's schema applies is empty.
This keyword produces an annotation value which is an array of the
indexes or property names to which this keyword validates successfully
when applying its subschema, in ascending order. The value MAY be a
boolean "true" if the subschema validates successfully when applied to
every index or property value of the instance. The annotation MUST be
present if the instance array or object to which this keyword's schema
applies is empty.
</t>
</section>
</section>
Expand Down
16 changes: 8 additions & 8 deletions jsonschema-validation.xml
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -410,13 +410,13 @@
then this keyword has no effect.
</t>
<t>
An instance array is valid against "maxContains" in two ways, depending on
the form of the annotation result of an adjacent
An instance array or object is valid against "maxContains" in two ways,
depending on the form of the annotation result of an adjacent
<xref target="json-schema">"contains"</xref> keyword. The first way is if
the annotation result is an array and the length of that array is less than
or equal to the "maxContains" value. The second way is if the annotation
result is a boolean "true" and the instance array length is less than or
equal to the "maxContains" value.
result is a boolean "true" and the instance length is less than or equal to
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can "length" be applied to objects? Maybe we keep "instance array length" and add "or property count"?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think "length" makes sense. It may be an object, but in this context, it's being treated like a map, which does have a concept of length. But I you think it's questionable, others will be confused, so we should be more explicit.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

"number of properties" is explicit and doesn't depend on a language/framework's particular data model.

the "maxContains" value.
</t>
</section>

Expand All @@ -429,13 +429,13 @@
then this keyword has no effect.
</t>
<t>
An instance array is valid against "minContains" in two ways, depending on
the form of the annotation result of an adjacent
An instance array or object is valid against "minContains" in two ways,
depending on the form of the annotation result of an adjacent
<xref target="json-schema">"contains"</xref> keyword. The first way is if
the annotation result is an array and the length of that array is greater
than or equal to the "minContains" value. The second way is if the
annotation result is a boolean "true" and the instance array length is
greater than or equal to the "minContains" value.
annotation result is a boolean "true" and the instance length is greater
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Same here.

than or equal to the "minContains" value.
</t>
<t>
A value of 0 is allowed, but is only useful for setting a range
Expand Down