-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 13
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.
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
Can variable object be really empty or not #30
Can variable object be really empty or not #30
Comments
We have exactly the same situation with https://www.asyncapi.com/docs/specifications/2.0.0/#a-name-oauthflowsobject-a-oauth-flows-object where there is nothing about https://github.com/asyncapi/asyncapi/blob/master/versions/2.0.0/schema.json#L1285 so in theory this is correct https://github.com/asyncapi/tck/blob/master/tests/asyncapi-2.0/Security%20Scheme%20Object/oauth2/valid-empty-flows.yaml#L27 |
Hi. I have no opinion on the issue as I've learned about the |
I don't have an opinion either. It doesn't make sense to have it empty or null but not sure it should raise an error. |
ok then, I'll work on a PR to https://github.com/asyncapi/asyncapi/ and https://github.com/asyncapi/asyncapi-node |
@fmvilas please approve asyncapi/spec-json-schemas#14 and asyncapi/spec#424 |
Reason/Context
This test case assumes Variable object can be empty as the spec doesn't require any property for Variable object but JSON Schema for the spec has
"minProperties": 1
requirement.I think we discussed it once but don't forget the conclusion, damn butter. Are we in a position that AsyncAPI JSON Schema complements the AsyncAPI Spec Markdown document or should it just reflect the spec as much as possible, but not complement it. I like the approach that schema complements the spec but I also understand that it might be a bit confusing for the spec audience 🤔 I think I would treat https://github.com/asyncapi/asyncapi/blob/master/versions/2.0.0/schema.json#L212 as a bug for 2.0.0. What do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: