Specify configuration object for type properties in schema

[michael]

Currently for properties we only specify a type.

 "location": {
 "type": "location",
 "name": "Location",
 "properties": {
 "name": "string",
 "citizens": ["array", "person"]
 }
 }

Maybe we should change this in favor of an object where we can add more specs like a required property.

 "location": {
 "type": "location",
 "name": "Location",
 "properties": {
 "name": {
 "type": "string",
 "required": true
 },
 "citizens": {
 "type": ["array", "person"]
 }
 }

Or we just say such integrity checks should be done by the app.. not the schema. What do you think?

[obuchtala]

Rather would prefer going without that for now.
However, we should think if there is anything else we would add in future,
thus, switching to an object would make sense then.

On Jul 5, 2013, at 12:12 AM, Michael Aufreiter notifications@github.com wrote:

Currently for properties we only specify a type.

 "location": {
 "type": "location",
 "name": "Location",
 "properties": {
 "name": "string",
 "citizens": ["array", "person"]
 }
 }

Maybe we should change this in favor of an object where we can add more specs like a required property.

 "location": {
 "type": "location",
 "name": "Location",
 "properties": {
 "name": {
 "type": "string",
 "required": true
 },
 "citizens": {
 "type": ["array", "person"]
 }
 }

Or we just say such integrity checks should be done by the app.. not the schema. What do you think?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.