Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Update meta schema #30

Open
wants to merge 8 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Update meta schema #30

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
8 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
512fc54
update meta schema
nvnieuwk May 3, 2024
5add093
Merge branch 'master' into update-meta-schema
nvnieuwk Jul 10, 2024
b048bfe
remove some useless formats
nvnieuwk Jul 10, 2024
7393008
fix some typos
nvnieuwk Jul 10, 2024
0133280
add keyword descriptions
nvnieuwk Jul 10, 2024
4bf250a
add checks for exists and schema
nvnieuwk Jul 10, 2024
924ff34
use the right annotation for comments
nvnieuwk Jul 10, 2024
b048276
allow schemas without `defs`
nvnieuwk Jul 10, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
108 changes: 100 additions & 8 deletions parameters_meta_schema.json
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -59,6 +59,15 @@
"required": {
"type": "array"
},
"dependentRequired": {
"type": "object",
"additionalProperties": {
"type": "array",
"items": { "type": "string" },
"uniqueItems": true,
"default": []
}
},
"properties": {
"type": "object",
"patternProperties": {
Expand All @@ -69,12 +78,44 @@
],
"properties": {
"type": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["string", "boolean", "integer", "number"]
"anyOf": [
{
"$ref": "#/$defs/typeAnnotation"
},
{
"type": "array",
"items": {
"$ref": "#/$defs/typeAnnotation"
}
}
]
},
"format": {
"type": "string",
"enum": ["file-path", "directory-path", "path", "file-path-pattern"]
"enum": [
"file-path",
"directory-path",
"path",
"file-path-pattern",
"date-time",
"date",
"time",
"duration",
"email",
"idn-email",
"hostname",
"id-hostname",
"ipv4",
"ipv6",
"uuid",
"uri",
"uri-reference",
"iri",
"iri-reference",
"uri-template",
"json-pointer",
"regex"
]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I don't think that we do want all of these though.

Although JSON schema libraries can validate them, the launch form / schema builder / other tooling wouldn't know what to do with them.

Not sure that there's any point allowing them for validation if they will break other tooling. Any of these things can still be set as a string without format being set.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

@nvnieuwk nvnieuwk May 6, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure having the other tooling break on an unknown format is that great of an idea. Maybe they should just ignore the formats that are unknown. Some of these formats could be really useful for nextflow pipelines I think (regex, email and uri to name a few). Although I do agree that some don't make any sense to be in here.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure having the other tooling break on an unknown format is that great of an idea.

If they're listed here then other tooling would accept the schema but then not know what to do with the format and either ignore it or break. So I'm suggesting slimming it down for the same reason 😅

My expectation of how this will work is that tools will check the schema against the meta schema and show a warning if it fails. So for example:

Warning: Schema seems invalid - value 'ipv6' not allowed for 'format'

It would then hopefully still continue to try to use the schema as best it can. Which I think is better than including them all, not knowing in advance, and then breaking.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Okay so I think these make the most sense to keep:

[
                          "file-path",
                          "directory-path",
                          "path",
                          "file-path-pattern",
                          "date-time",
                          "date",
                          "time",
                          "email",
                          "uri",
                          "regex"
                        ]

Do you agree or should I also remove the ones that aren't built-in to the plugin?

},
"exists": {
"type": "boolean"
Expand All @@ -85,6 +126,7 @@
},
"pattern": {
"type": "string",
"format": "regex",
"minLength": 1
},
"schema": {
Expand All @@ -105,20 +147,51 @@
"type": "string",
"minLength": 1
},
"default": {
"$ref": "#/$def/allTypes"
},
"examples": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"$ref": "#/$def/allTypes"
}
},
"deprecated": {
"type": "boolean"
},
"hidden": {
"type": "boolean"
},
"minLength": {
"type": "integer"
"$ref": "#/$def/nonNegativeInteger"
},
"maxLength": {
"type": "integer"
"$ref": "#/$def/nonNegativeInteger"
},
"minimum": {
"type": "integer"
"type": "number"
},
"exclusiveMinimum": {
"type": "number"
},
"maximum": {
"type": "integer"
"type": "number"
},
"exclusiveMaximum": {
"type": "number"
},
"multipleOf": {
"type": "number"
},
"enum": {
"type": "array",
"uniqueItems": true,
"items": {
"$ref": "#/$def/allTypes"
}
},
"const": {
"$ref": "#/$def/allTypes"
}
}
}
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -151,5 +224,24 @@
"title",
"description",
"type"
]
],
"$defs": {
"typeAnnotation": {
"type": "string",
"enum": [
"string",
"boolean",
"integer",
"number",
"null"
]
},
"allTypes": {
"type": ["integer", "boolean", "number", "string", "null"]
},
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

How is this different to the one above?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The above one is a definition that states the value should be a string of one of these: "string", "boolean", "integer", "number" or "null".
The bottom one states that value should be one of those types. (It's just a shortcut I wrote to keep the redundancy as low as I could)

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Gotcha 👍🏻 Can you reference this above as well so that there's only one set, out of interest? I guess not as it needs a $ref key and that'd break the array structure.. 🤔

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm not sure I'm following what you mean here 😁

"nonNegativeInteger": {
"type": "integer",
"minimum": 0
}
}
}
Loading