-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 92
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
Add v3.1 schema and validation based on it #117
Conversation
Hi @cebe, any plans regarding this PR? Is there something missing that I could help? |
Hey @cebe I hate to ping, but ping? |
Had a quick play with this, With a valid schema:
And when breaking some random stuff in the schema to see it catches the issues it's also flagging what I'd expect:
I'm not too well-versed in the openapi 3.0/3.1 spec differences to say if this might need more work to complete the 3.1 integration but so far this seems to be working well. |
Other differences that we need to implement to fully support 3.1 are listed in #101 |
Got a bunch of that ready to be PRed once this PR is in. |
@@ -0,0 +1,1347 @@ | |||
{ |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@cebe you provide a make file script schemas/openapi-v3.0.json
and schemas/openapi-v3.0.yaml
.
Both scripts use the composer virtual dependency oai/openapi-specification
which also needs to be updated.
This Pull Request didn't update these files. Should it be removed, or would you prefer an update of the package and make file?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@marcelthole Can look at that if desired, don't recall how I got the 3.1
files but probably just downloaded them.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
did that in #128
@WyriHaximus thanks for starting this, I made a slightly different implementation in #128, which replaces this PR but includes most of your changes. |
@cebe Sweet! |
No description provided.