Consider to add one or more validation steps to assure TD consistency
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- HTML
- Stars
- 45
- Forks
- 21
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
In #231 we simplified the validation algorithm to just one step. This step leverage on the JSONSchema defined in the TD specs. However, to the best of my knowledge, JSONSchema does not handle complex constraints between fields. For example, if a particular value of the field is only admitted if another field as a specific value.
Currently, we do not check if a form of an affordance has the correct op values. For example, a property might have a form with "op": ["invokeAction"] and still be a valid TD for the current JSONSchema. We should look in those use cases (and maybe find some more) and update the validation algorithm consequently.
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start with the validation algorithm and the JSONSchema defined in the TD specifications. Review affordance forms and their op values, including the invokeAction example, then identify additional cross-field cases; done means invalid combinations are rejected by the validation steps.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Domain
- api
- Issue type
- Feature
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 35/100