anyOf fields with empty required arrays are treated as required

[alexkreidler]

I have a JSON Schema:

"TextBaseline": {
    "anyOf": [
        {
            "const": "alphabetic",
            "type": "string"
        },
        {
            "$ref": "#/definitions/Baseline"
        },
        {
            "const": "line-top",
            "type": "string"
        },
        {
            "const": "line-bottom",
            "type": "string"
        }
    ]
}

Which becomes

"TextBaseline": {
    "anyOf": [
        {
            "const": "alphabetic",
            "type": "string"
        },
        {
            "enum": [
                "top",
                "middle",
                "bottom"
            ],
            "type": "string"
        }
        {
            "const": "line-top",
            "type": "string"
        },
        {
            "const": "line-bottom",
            "type": "string"
        }
    ]
}

and then the compiled schema becomes:

{
    "anyOf": [
        {
            "const": "alphabetic",
            "type": "string"
        },
        {
            "enum": [
                "top",
                "middle",
                "bottom"
            ],
            "type": "string"
        },
        {
            "const": "line-top",
            "type": "string"
        },
        {
            "const": "line-bottom",
            "type": "string"
        }
    ],
    "properties": {},
    "required": [],
    "type": "string",
    "isRequired": false
}

Now a string Field is rendered, but with the property required set to an empty array. Surprisingly, this results in the field being required.

The interface shows the required asterisk, and I cannot submit the form because it doesn't validate.

Please fix so an empty array means the field is not required.

Thanks for this great library!

[radekmie]

Hi @alexkreidler. I see where the problem is (field receives required: []), but I'm not sure how to proceed here. Technically, required should be ignored for non-objects. Maybe changing this condition to include non-booleans would be enough. If you'd like to, give it a try. If not, we'll look into it.

[alexkreidler]

Thanks, that's very helpful.

I'll try that change out within this week hopefully. I'll report back here if it works, then maybe send a PR.