Validation of required fields inconsistent
还没有人认领这个 Issue。
评估
- 难度
- 5/5
- 预计耗时
- 一周以上
- 新手友好度
- 25/100
- Issue 类型
- 缺陷
- 描述清晰度
- 需要澄清
- 活跃度
- 停滞
- 技术栈
- python
- 领域
- api, testing-qa
调研方向
The issue names no files or tests. First read the linked discussions and referenced issues #154, #312, #97, and #266 to determine the intended required-field validation policy, then locate the corresponding validator and tests. Done means the project has a decided, consistent behavior for standard, allOf, and referenced schemas, with coverage for that behavior.
由索引模型根据 Issue 内容生成。
描述
The validation of the required keyword does not make sense as it is implemented right now, IMHO.
- It really does not make any sense to list properties in
requiredthat do not exist. - If you want to use it with
allOfand therefore have properties inrequiredthat do not exist, there are already precautions (#154). - Currently, there is no validation error in the standard case but as soon as I have
allOfin my schema, there is a validation error. That is inconsistent. The PR that breaks it: #312 - In
$referenced schemas, the validation does not take effect either.
One of the main reasons why this should urgently be validated (as was in version 0.7.0) is that validators (that use the specification to validate requests/responses) will fail if there is e.g. a typo in one of the entries in required. And now there is no way to detect that.
In general, the OpenAPI/JsonSchema specification is quite relaxed. If only the bare minimum should be validated, this is probably not the only validation that can basically be removed completely.
My take on this:
- Best case: Throw validation errors for things that are obvious errors (like specifying a field as required that does not even exist).
- Second best option: make it configurable ("strict mode") or filterable (error IDs to exclude, filter levels, ...).
- Absolutely necessary minium: make it consistent.
I'd be willing to provide a PR. But since this has been going back and forth I'd like a decision first, where this is going.
- 主要语言
- Python
- 星标
- 409
- 派生
- 73
- PR 合并指标
- 30 天内没有已合并 PR
贡献指南
从这里开始
- 先读完整个 Issue,再读项目的贡献指南。
- 在 Issue 下留言说明你要接手 —— 这能避免两个人做同样的事。
- Fork 仓库,在一个分支上完成修改。
- 提交 Pull Request,并在描述里引用这个 Issue 编号。
python-openapi/openapi-spec-validator 的其他 Issue
-
难度 4/5 3-5 天 新手友好度 55/100
-
难度 3/5 1-2 天 新手友好度 55/100
-
难度 3/5 1-2 天 新手友好度 30/100
-
难度 4/5 3-5 天 新手友好度 42/100
python-openapi/openapi-spec-validator#400 · 1 条评论 ·
-
难度 3/5 1-2 天 新手友好度 45/100
查看 python-openapi/openapi-spec-validator 的全部 Issue
相似的 Issue
-
Add: hunch 未关闭
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 74/100
AbdelStark/awesome-typesafe#104 ·
-
enhancement
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 72/100
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 68/100
DiamondLightSource/dodal#2211 ·
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 88/100
openml/openml-python#1749 ·
-
难度 2/5 1-3 小时 新手友好度 88/100
sipyourdrink-ltd/bernstein#6191 ·