improve definition of keyword relationships (affects and affectedBy) #125
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
sebastian-toepfer
changed the title
sebastian-toepfer
force-pushed
the
improve_keyword_relationship
branch
2 times, most recently
from
04b459e
to
ba0012a
Compare
…eyword instead of define a affectedBy relationship with list of strings we us a list of new introduces object AffectedBy with a name (the old string) and a new AffectByType. The AffectByType can be Extends this only shows that the keyword stays not alone and the validation result can be altered. Or Replace with how the names say replace the affected keyword with the affectedBy keyword. this allow to change the validation result in both directions und a more flexible way to do it.
sebastian-toepfer
force-pushed
the
improve_keyword_relationship
branch
2 times, most recently
from
a8f4036
to
e2ca6c0
Compare
instead of define a affects relationship with list of strings we us a list of new introduces object Affects with a name (the old string) and a new AbsenceStrategy. The AbsenceStrategy can be use to define what should be happens if the keyword is missing. At default is exists two: Provide a default value -> useful if the affected works without the affectedBy one Replace -> useful if the affected doesn't works without the affectedBy one
sebastian-toepfer
force-pushed
the
improve_keyword_relationship
branch
from
e2ca6c0
to
fa76f02
Compare
|
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The current implementation is very limited. To change the functionality of a relationship, the keywords themselves must be changed (violation of the Openclose principle).
AffectedBy
AffectedBy defines a relationship where the output is affected by the defined keywords. In most cases, this means that a “true” can be changed to a “false” (e.g. maxContains for contains) or simply defines which data the keyword affects (e.g. additionalProperties uses properties and patternProperties). In some cases, however, the presence of the other keyword means that the keyword in question can deliver neither true nor false (e.g. minContains for contains).
To solve this problem without completely linking the keywords, we define the type of relationship (
AffectByType).AffectType:
Extends means that the keyword is fully evaluated, but the true output can be affected by another keyword and changed to false.
Replace means that the keyword is not evaluated (neither as an applicator nor as an assertion), but the other keyword takes over completely.
sample for contains Keyword:
Affects
Affects defines keywords that are modified by this keyword. In most cases, the absence of this keyword is not a big problem, but for some it means that the other is not needed (e.g. minContains has no meaning without contains)
Solution Affects becomes a default value if keyword is absent.