-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
Schema version 6 #48
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
Schema version 6 #48
Conversation
jthrilly
left a comment
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.
Do we also need a migration for this, even if it is just blank and contains the info about the new functionality that it enables?
| "items": { | ||
| "$ref": "#/definitions/Behaviours" | ||
| }, | ||
| "minItems": 1 |
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.
Other similar object keys don't have a minItems. I'm not really sure if they should be updated, or if this one shouldn't have any minimum. Thoughts?
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.
I thought that was odd too. This value hasn't been changed from schema 5. Perhaps we should open an issue to remove it where it isn't needed?
schemas/6.json
Outdated
| }, | ||
| "Behaviours": { | ||
| "type": "object", | ||
| "additionalProperties": false, |
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.
I'm thinking perhaps we should set this to true so that future behaviour implementations don't require a new schema version. What do you think?
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.
Hmm, yes it does seem a bit restrictive.
I think so long as interfaces can work without properties being defined then that would be okay.
Maybe Interviewer could flag unknown additonal properties?
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.
Yeah, I think that's a better way of doing it.
Adds support for automatic layout on Sociogram: complexdatacollective/Interviewer#1156
New property added to behaviours in interface definition, which is structured as an object to allow more parameters in future: