OpenAPI v3.1 as a JSON Schema "Vocabulary"#1957
Closed
philsturgeon wants to merge 9 commits into
Closed
Conversation
Loading
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
6 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
As a follow-up to the June 13th TSC call, I am working on showing you what OpenAPI v3.1 on "JSON Schema Draft 8" could look like. The WIP JSON Schema draft added a fantastic new feature called vocabularies, which allow for extension languages like OpenAPI to add their own keywords.
Basically, instead of the OpenAPI spec listing out every single similarity and difference in its subset superset sideset confusing situation, OpenAPI just extends the JSON Schema core and valaidation vocabs and adds a few keywords of its own.
This solves the OpenAPI <≠> JSON Schema divergence nicely. The biggest thing here is explaining how exclusiveMinimum and exclusiveMaximum are different from latest JSON Schema, which was done to support BC between v3.0 and v3.1.
The most controversial part of this is my choice to mark things like
nullable: trueandexampleas deprecated. This can certainly be removed, but I think it would be a good idea to start pushing folks towards one way of doing things instead of two.Timeline for removal would essentially be maybe v4.0, or v5.0, or never, but deprecation itself is a good way to move folks in the right direction, and allow tooling to start giving warnings.