fix(rulesets): required readOnly and writeOnly properties should not … #2573
Conversation
pplr
force-pushed
the
fix/read-write-only-examples
branch
7 times, most recently
from
8ddecd1
to
7fd98c3
Compare
… properties Required readOnly and writeOnly properties should not be considered required for respectively request and response bodies.
pplr
force-pushed
the
fix/read-write-only-examples
branch
from
7fd98c3
to
2352e39
Compare
| parent, | ||
| propertyName, | ||
| ) => { | ||
| if ((fragment.readOnly === true && readOnlyProperties) || (fragment.writeOnly === true && writeOnlyProperties)) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could we also change the schema to false or not: true?
That's to ensure we catch if the property is defined.
To illustrate it with example:
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": {
"type": "string",
"readOnly": true
}
},
"required": [
"foo"
]
}The above schema would be transformed to
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": false
}
}This way we wouldn't let property "foo" be defined.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hi @P0lip, do you request to make readOnly / writeOnly properties forbidden on request / response? Not sure that this is the exact definition of the read and writeOnly flags.
The 3.0 OAS spec says "SHOULD NOT".
For OAS 3.1 / json schema, the readOnly / writeOnly definition is more open.
If
readOnlyhas a value of boolean true, it indicates that the value of the
instance is managed exclusively by the owning authority, and attempts by an
application to modify the value of this property are expected to be ignored or
rejected by that owning authority.
Your proposal could be optional and enabled with a flag like 'strict-read-write-only' ?
P0lip
force-pushed
the
develop
branch
3 times, most recently
from
dc90b7a
to
c22f408
Compare
…be considered required for respectively request and response bodies
Fixes #1274.
Checklist
Does this PR introduce a breaking change?