Merge pull request #666 from epoberezkin/beta

Version 6.0.0

.gitignore

@@ -37,3 +37,5 @@ lib/dotjs/*.js
 
 # bundles
 dist/
+
+package-lock.json

.travis.yml

@@ -5,8 +5,8 @@ before_script:
 node_js:
   - "4"
   - "6"
-  - "7"
   - "8"
+  - "9"
 after_script:
   - codeclimate-test-reporter < coverage/lcov.info
   - coveralls < coverage/lcov.info

CONTRIBUTING.md

@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ Thank you for your help making Ajv better! Every contribution is appreciated. If
   - [Bug reports](#bug-reports)
   - [Change proposals](#changes)
   - [Browser and compatibility issues](#compatibility)
-  - [JSON schema standard](#json-schema)
+  - [JSON Schema standard](#json-schema)
   - [Ajv usage questions](#usage)
 - [Code](#code)
   - [Development](#development)
@@ -33,7 +33,7 @@ Please make sure to include the following information in the issue:
 
 1. What version of Ajv are you using? Does the issue happen if you use the latest version?
 2. Ajv options object (see https://github.com/epoberezkin/ajv#options).
-3. JSON schema and the data you are validating (please make it as small as possible to reproduce the issue).
+3. JSON Schema and the data you are validating (please make it as small as possible to reproduce the issue).
 4. Your code (please use `options`, `schema` and `data` as variables).
 5. Validation result, data AFTER validation, error messages.
 6. What results did you expect?
@@ -63,7 +63,7 @@ Please include as much details as possible.
 
 #### <a name="compatibility"></a>Browser and compatibility issues
 
-[Create an issue](https://github.com/epoberezkin/ajv/issues/new?labels=compatibility&body=**The%20version%20of%20Ajv%20you%20are%20using**%0A%0A**The%20environment%20you%20have%20the%20problem%20with.**%0A%0A**Your%20code%20(please%20make%20it%20as%20small%20as%20possible%20to%20reproduce%20the%20issue).**%0A%0A**If%20your%20issue%20is%20in%20the%20browser,%20please%20list%20the%20other%20packages%20loaded%20in%20the%20page%20in%20the%20order%20they%20are%20loaded.%20Please%20check%20if%20the%20issue%20gets%20resolved%20(or%20results%20change)%20if%20you%20move%20Ajv%20bundle%20closer%20to%20the%20top.**%0A%0A**Results%20in%20node.js%20v4.**%0A%0A**Results%20and%20error%20messages%20in%20your%20platform.**%0A%0A) to report a compatibility problem that only happens in a particular environemnt (when your code works correctly in node.js v4 in linux systems but fails in some other environment).
+[Create an issue](https://github.com/epoberezkin/ajv/issues/new?labels=compatibility&body=**The%20version%20of%20Ajv%20you%20are%20using**%0A%0A**The%20environment%20you%20have%20the%20problem%20with.**%0A%0A**Your%20code%20(please%20make%20it%20as%20small%20as%20possible%20to%20reproduce%20the%20issue).**%0A%0A**If%20your%20issue%20is%20in%20the%20browser,%20please%20list%20the%20other%20packages%20loaded%20in%20the%20page%20in%20the%20order%20they%20are%20loaded.%20Please%20check%20if%20the%20issue%20gets%20resolved%20(or%20results%20change)%20if%20you%20move%20Ajv%20bundle%20closer%20to%20the%20top.**%0A%0A**Results%20in%20node.js%20v4.**%0A%0A**Results%20and%20error%20messages%20in%20your%20platform.**%0A%0A) to report a compatibility problem that only happens in a particular environment (when your code works correctly in node.js v4 in linux systems but fails in some other environment).
 
 Please include this information:
 
@@ -75,11 +75,9 @@ Please include this information:
 6. Results and error messages in your platform.
 
 
-#### <a name="json-schema"></a>Using JSON schema standard
+#### <a name="json-schema"></a>Using JSON Schema standard
 
-Ajv implements JSON schema standard draft 4 and the proposed extensions for the next version of the standard (available when you use the option `v5: true`).
-
-If the issue is related to using v5 extensions please submit it as a [bug report](https://github.com/epoberezkin/ajv/issues/new).
+Ajv implements JSON Schema standard draft-04 and draft-06/07.
 
 If it is a general issue related to using the standard keywords included in JSON Schema or implementing some advanced validation logic please ask the question on [Stack Overflow](http://stackoverflow.com/questions/ask?tags=jsonschema,ajv) (my account is [esp](http://stackoverflow.com/users/1816503/esp)) or submitting the question to [JSON-Schema.org](https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/new). Please mention @epoberezkin.
 

CUSTOM.md

@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ This way to define keywords is useful for:
 __Please note__: In cases when validation flow is different depending on the schema and you have to use `if`s, this way to define keywords will have worse performance than compiled keyword returning different validation functions depending on the schema.
 
 
-Example. `constant` keyword (a synonym for draft6 keyword `const`, it is equivalent to `enum` keyword with one item):
+Example. `constant` keyword (a synonym for draft-06 keyword `const`, it is equivalent to `enum` keyword with one item):
 
 ```javascript
 ajv.addKeyword('constant', {
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ The access to the parent data object and the current property name allow to crea
 
 The function should return validation result as boolean. It can return an array of validation errors via `.errors` property of itself (otherwise a standard error will be used).
 
-In some cases it is the best approach to define keywords, but it has the performance cost of an extra function call during validation. If keyword logic can be expressed via some other JSON-schema then `macro` keyword definition is more efficient (see below).
+In some cases it is the best approach to define keywords, but it has the performance cost of an extra function call during validation. If keyword logic can be expressed via some other JSON Schema then `macro` keyword definition is more efficient (see below).
 
 All custom keywords types can have an optional `metaSchema` property in their definitions. It is a schema against which the value of keyword will be validated during schema compilation.
 
@@ -134,7 +134,7 @@ See note on custom errors and asynchronous keywords in the previous section.
 
 "Macro" function is called during schema compilation. It is passed schema, parent schema and [schema compilation context](#schema-compilation-context) and it should return another schema that will be applied to the data in addition to the original schema.
 
-It is the most efficient approach (in cases when the keyword logic can be expressed with another JSON-schema) because it is usually easy to implement and there is no extra function call during validation.
+It is the most efficient approach (in cases when the keyword logic can be expressed with another JSON Schema) because it is usually easy to implement and there is no extra function call during validation.
 
 In addition to the errors from the expanded schema macro keyword will add its own error in case validation fails.
 

FAQ.md

@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ No. In many cases there is a module responsible for the validation in the applic
 
 Doing this would create a precedent where validated data is used in error messages, creating a vulnerability (e.g., when ajv is used to validate API data/parameters and error messages are logged).
 
-Since the property name is already in the params object, in an application you can modify messages in any way you need. ajv-errors package will allow to modify messages as well - templating is [not there yet](https://github.com/epoberezkin/ajv-errors/issues/4), though.
+Since the property name is already in the params object, in an application you can modify messages in any way you need. ajv-errors package allows modifying messages as well.
 
 
 ## Additional properties inside compound keywords anyOf, oneOf, etc.
@@ -39,7 +39,7 @@ See [#127](https://github.com/epoberezkin/ajv/issues/127), [#129](https://github
 
 ##### Why the keyword `additionalProperties: false` fails validation when some properties are "declared" inside a subschema in `anyOf`/etc.?
 
-The keyword `additionalProperties` creates the restriction on validated data based on its own value (`false` or schema object) and on the keywords `properties` and `patternProperties` in the SAME schema object. JSON-schema validators must NOT take into account properties used in other schema objects.
+The keyword `additionalProperties` creates the restriction on validated data based on its own value (`false` or schema object) and on the keywords `properties` and `patternProperties` in the SAME schema object. JSON Schema validators must NOT take into account properties used in other schema objects.
 
 While you can expect that the schema below would allow the objects either with properties `foo` and `bar` or with properties `foo` and `baz` and all other properties will be prohibited, this schema will only allow objects with one property `foo` (an empty object and any non-objects will also be valid):
 
@@ -84,5 +84,5 @@ There were many conversations about the meaning of `$ref` in [JSON Schema GitHub
 
 There are two possible approaches:
 
-1. Write code to traverse schema and replace every `$ref` with the referenced schema. An additional limitation is that `"$ref"` inside keywords "properties", "patternProperties" and "dependencies" means property name (or pattern) rather than the reference to another schema.
+1. Traverse schema (e.g. with json-schema-traverse) and replace every `$ref` with the referenced schema.
 2. Use a specially constructed JSON Schema with a [custom keyword](https://github.com/epoberezkin/ajv/blob/master/CUSTOM.md) to traverse and modify your schema.