In jsonSchema you can indicate whether defined fields are mandatory or not using the "required" attribute:
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"header": {
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"messageName": {
"type": "string"
},
"messageVersion": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"required": [
"messageName",
"messageVersion"
]
}
},
"required": [
"header"
]
}
In certain cases, I would like the messageVersion field not to be mandatory. Is there any way to make the mandatory-ness of the this field conditional?
Depending on your situation, there are a few different approaches. I can think of four different ways to conditionally require a field.
Dependencies
The dependentSchemas keyword is a conditional way to apply a schema. Foreach property in dependentSchemas, if the property is present in the JSON being validated, then the schema associated with that key must also be valid. If the "foo" property is present, then the "bar" property is required
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "type": "string" },
"bar": { "type": "string" }
},
"dependentSchemas": {
"foo": { "required": ["bar"] }
}
}
If all the dependent schema needs is the required keyword, you can use the dependentRequired keyword as a shorthand. The following has the same effect as the previous example.
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "type": "string" },
"bar": { "type": "string" }
},
"dependentRequired": {
"foo": ["bar"]
}
}
NOTE: In draft-07 and below these were one keyword called dependencies. If the value is a schema it behaved like dependentSchemas. If the value is an array, it behaved like dependentRequired.
Implication
If your condition depends on the value of a field, you can use a boolean logic concept called implication. "A implies B" effectively means, if A is true then B must also be true. Implication can also be expressed as "!A or B". Either the "foo" property does not equal "bar", or the "bar" property is required. Or, in other words: If the "foo" property equals "bar", Then the "bar" property is required
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "type": "string" },
"bar": { "type": "string" }
},
"anyOf": [
{
"not": {
"properties": {
"foo": { "const": "bar" }
},
"required": ["foo"]
}
},
{ "required": ["bar"] }
]
}
If "foo" is not equal to "bar", #/anyOf/0 matches and validation succeeds. If "foo" equals "bar", #/anyOf/0 fails and #/anyOf/1 must be valid for the anyOf validation to be successful.
NOTE: The if/then keywords have the same behavior, but are easier to read and maintain. It's recommended to only use this approach if you are using an older version of JSON Schema that doesn't support if/then.
Enum
If your conditional is based on an enum, it's a little more straight forward. "foo" can be "bar" or "baz". If "foo" equals "bar", then "bar" is required. If "foo" equals "baz", then "baz" is required.
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "enum": ["bar", "baz"] },
"bar": { "type": "string" },
"baz": { "type": "string" }
},
"anyOf": [
{
"properties": {
"foo": { "const": "bar" }
},
"required": ["bar"]
},
{
"properties": {
"foo": { "const": "baz" }
},
"required": ["baz"]
}
]
}
NOTE: This approach is not recommended because it can produce confusing error messages. The if/then keywords are generally a better approach.
If-Then-Else
The if, then and else keywords are shorthand for the implication pattern described above. These keywords were added in draft-07. If the "foo" property equals "bar", Then the "bar" property is required
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "type": "string" },
"bar": { "type": "string" }
},
"if": {
"properties": {
"foo": { "const": "bar" }
},
"required": ["foo"]
},
"then": { "required": ["bar"] }
}
EDIT 12/23/2017: Implication section updated and If-Then-Else section added.
EDIT 06/04/2018: Bugfix for If-Then-Else and update singleton enums to use const.
EDIT 07/06/2022: Update Dependencies section to use the new dependentSchemas/dependentRequired keywords instead of dependencies.
As of 2022, dependencies has been deprecated, and split into dependentRequired (see e.g. this example) and dependentSchemas (see e.g. this example). Just using dependentRequired solves the issue:
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "type": "string" },
"bar": { "type": "string" }
},
"dependentRequired": {
"foo": ["bar"]
}
}
Found the solution to this.
Using allOf works for me.
Was just using a diff dependency altogether.
The right one to use for draft07 schema is :
<dependency>
<groupId>com.github.erosb</groupId>
<artifactId>everit-json-schema-jdk6</artifactId>
<version>1.9.2</version>
</dependency>
Related
Running ajv-cli as part of my automated testing scripts to make sure my mock data is up to date.
./node_modules/.bin/ajv -s ./test-data/manifest.schema.json -d ./test-data/fleet.manifest.json
./test-data/fleet.manifest.json valid
But the data isn't valid.
manifest.schema.json:
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
"definitions": {
"ManifestHistoryItem": {
"properties": {
"id": {
"default": [
"assetCatalog",
"Roster"
],
"items": {
"type": "string"
},
"type": "array"
},
"name": {
"default": "",
"type": "string"
}
},
"required": [
"id",
"name"
],
"type": "object"
}
}
}
fleet.manifest.json:
{
"namee": "Epic Space Battles"
}
(it's missing the required "id" property, and "name" is misspelled)
Schema is generated from "typescript-json-schema": "^0.54.0" from a typescript model and evaluated via "ajv-cli": "^5.0.0".
Your schema declares definitions, but it doesn't reference them anywhere. You need to add a "$ref": "#/definitions/ManifestHistoryItem" at the root.
{
"definitions": {
"ManifestHistoryItem": { ... }
},
"$ref": "#/definitions/ManifestHistoryItem"
}
Either that or you can just get rid of the definitions wrapper altogether and just have the { ... } part from above.
Effectively what's happening is you've defined an empty schema, which applies no constraints, meaning all instances (data) pass.
The file being validated looks like this:
MyArray:
- someItemWithRandomName:
one: f9jfw9j302
two: 09dj0293jff
three: 09dj0293jff
- someOtherItemWithRandomName:
one: f9jfw9j302
two: 09dj0293jff
three: 09dj0293jff
- anotherItem:
one: f9jfw9j302
two: 09dj0293jff
three: 09dj0293jff
I'm validating it like this:
"MyArray": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"type": "object",
"additionalProperties": false,
"required": [
"one",
"two",
"three"
],
"properties": {
"one": {
"type": "string"
},
"two": {
"type": "string"
},
"three": {
"type": "string"
}
}
}
I don't want to allow fields in the array items not defined in the schema but "additionalProperties": false doesn't work because the array item's keys can be any string. How do you accommodate this?
Edit
Here is a live example of my validation. The YAML I assume is going to be converted to JSON like in this example before it's validated: https://www.jsonschemavalidator.net/s/PBmLkkBl
You're missing a level in your schema, to allow the array item's object properties to be named anything.
Try this:
"MyArray": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"type": "object",
"additionalProperties": {
"type": "object",
"additionalProperties": false,
"required": [
"one",
"two",
"three"
],
"properties": {
"one": {
"type": "string"
},
"two": {
"type": "string"
},
"three": {
"type": "string"
}
}
}
}
If you want to put a restriction on the names used in that intermediary level, you can replace "additionalProperties" with "patternProperties":
...
"patternProperties": {
"^[0-9]$": {
...
}
}
Or if you want to use a schema for the property names, you can use "propertyNames".
https://json-schema.org/understanding-json-schema/reference/object.html
(Posted solution on behalf of the question author to move it to the answer space).
My solution was to just remove the null items of the array because they were not being used. I think the only way to handle this correctly would be to do some kind of conditional validation to allow all properties with null values - if that's even possible.
I want to set up the conditional validation in my schema. I saw an example here on SO.
I have a similar setup, where I would like to validate if the field public is set to string "public". If it is set to "public" then I want to make fields description, attachmentUrl and tags required. If the field is not set to "public" then this fields are not required.
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
"title": "Update todo",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"public": {
"type": "string"
},
"description": {
"type": "string",
"minLength": 3
},
"tags": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"type": "string"
},
"uniqueItems": true,
"minItems": 1
},
"attachmentUrl": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"anyOf": [
{
"not": {
"properties": {
"public": { "const": "public" }
},
"required": ["public"]
}
},
{ "required": ["description", "tags", "attachmentUrl"] }
],
"additionalProperties": false
}
But, when I try to deploy it like that, I get the following error:
Invalid model specified: Validation Result: warnings : [], errors :
[Invalid model schema specified. Unsupported keyword(s): ["const"]]
The "const" keyword wasn't added until draft 06. You should upgrade to an implementation that supports at least that version.
https://json-schema.org/draft-06/json-schema-release-notes.html#additions-and-backwards-compatible-changes
Otherwise, you can use "enum" with a single value: "enum": ["public"]
I am new to JSON schemas. I have a property (property1) that is dependent on another property (property2), which in turn is dependent on a third property (property3). I am trying to figure out how to prevent the schema from validating property1 if property2 doesn't exist. I am using the Python jsonschema module for validating.
I have a simple schema with three properties: species, otherDescription, and otherDescriptionDetail. The rules I'm trying to enforce are:
1) if species = "Human", otherDescription is required.
2) if species = "Human" and otherDescription != "None", otherDescriptionDetail is required.
3) if species != "Human", neither of the other two fields is required.
My test JSON correctly fails validation if species is "Human" and otherDescription doesn't exist, but it also reports that otherDescriptionDetail is a required property even though at this point it shouldn't be because there is no otherDescription value to compare it against. Is it possible to implement this logic with a JSON schema?
This is my schema:
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
"$id":"http://example.com/test_schema.json",
"title": "annotations",
"description": "Validates file annotations",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"species": {
"description": "Type of species",
"anyOf": [
{
"const": "Human",
"description": "Homo sapiens"
},
{
"const": "Neanderthal",
"description": "Cave man"
}
]
},
"otherDescription": {
"type": "string"
},
"otherDescriptionDetail": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"required": [
"species"
],
"allOf": [
{
"if": {
"properties": {
"species": {
"const": "Human"
}
}
},
"then": {
"required": ["otherDescription"]
}
},
{
"if": {
"allOf": [
{
"properties": {
"species": {
"const": "Human"
},
"otherDescription": {
"not": {"const": "None"}
}
}
}
]
},
"then": {
"required": ["otherDescriptionDetail"]
}
}
]
}
My test JSON is:
{
"species": "Human"
}
The output that I want:
0: 'otherDescription' is a required property
The output that I am getting:
0: 'otherDescription' is a required property
1: 'otherDescriptionDetail' is a required property
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
You need to defined otherDescription as a required property insilde allOf. Otherwise allOf block will pass even if otherDescription not available.
"if": {
"allOf": [
{
"properties": {
"species": {
"const": "Human"
},
"otherDescription": {
"not": {"const": "None"}
}
},
"required": ["otherDescription"]
}
]
},
"then": {
"required": ["otherDescriptionDetail"]
}
In jsonSchema you can indicate whether defined fields are mandatory or not using the "required" attribute:
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"header": {
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"messageName": {
"type": "string"
},
"messageVersion": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"required": [
"messageName",
"messageVersion"
]
}
},
"required": [
"header"
]
}
In certain cases, I would like the messageVersion field not to be mandatory. Is there any way to make the mandatory-ness of the this field conditional?
Depending on your situation, there are a few different approaches. I can think of four different ways to conditionally require a field.
Dependencies
The dependentSchemas keyword is a conditional way to apply a schema. Foreach property in dependentSchemas, if the property is present in the JSON being validated, then the schema associated with that key must also be valid. If the "foo" property is present, then the "bar" property is required
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "type": "string" },
"bar": { "type": "string" }
},
"dependentSchemas": {
"foo": { "required": ["bar"] }
}
}
If all the dependent schema needs is the required keyword, you can use the dependentRequired keyword as a shorthand. The following has the same effect as the previous example.
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "type": "string" },
"bar": { "type": "string" }
},
"dependentRequired": {
"foo": ["bar"]
}
}
NOTE: In draft-07 and below these were one keyword called dependencies. If the value is a schema it behaved like dependentSchemas. If the value is an array, it behaved like dependentRequired.
Implication
If your condition depends on the value of a field, you can use a boolean logic concept called implication. "A implies B" effectively means, if A is true then B must also be true. Implication can also be expressed as "!A or B". Either the "foo" property does not equal "bar", or the "bar" property is required. Or, in other words: If the "foo" property equals "bar", Then the "bar" property is required
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "type": "string" },
"bar": { "type": "string" }
},
"anyOf": [
{
"not": {
"properties": {
"foo": { "const": "bar" }
},
"required": ["foo"]
}
},
{ "required": ["bar"] }
]
}
If "foo" is not equal to "bar", #/anyOf/0 matches and validation succeeds. If "foo" equals "bar", #/anyOf/0 fails and #/anyOf/1 must be valid for the anyOf validation to be successful.
NOTE: The if/then keywords have the same behavior, but are easier to read and maintain. It's recommended to only use this approach if you are using an older version of JSON Schema that doesn't support if/then.
Enum
If your conditional is based on an enum, it's a little more straight forward. "foo" can be "bar" or "baz". If "foo" equals "bar", then "bar" is required. If "foo" equals "baz", then "baz" is required.
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "enum": ["bar", "baz"] },
"bar": { "type": "string" },
"baz": { "type": "string" }
},
"anyOf": [
{
"properties": {
"foo": { "const": "bar" }
},
"required": ["bar"]
},
{
"properties": {
"foo": { "const": "baz" }
},
"required": ["baz"]
}
]
}
NOTE: This approach is not recommended because it can produce confusing error messages. The if/then keywords are generally a better approach.
If-Then-Else
The if, then and else keywords are shorthand for the implication pattern described above. These keywords were added in draft-07. If the "foo" property equals "bar", Then the "bar" property is required
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "type": "string" },
"bar": { "type": "string" }
},
"if": {
"properties": {
"foo": { "const": "bar" }
},
"required": ["foo"]
},
"then": { "required": ["bar"] }
}
EDIT 12/23/2017: Implication section updated and If-Then-Else section added.
EDIT 06/04/2018: Bugfix for If-Then-Else and update singleton enums to use const.
EDIT 07/06/2022: Update Dependencies section to use the new dependentSchemas/dependentRequired keywords instead of dependencies.
As of 2022, dependencies has been deprecated, and split into dependentRequired (see e.g. this example) and dependentSchemas (see e.g. this example). Just using dependentRequired solves the issue:
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "type": "string" },
"bar": { "type": "string" }
},
"dependentRequired": {
"foo": ["bar"]
}
}
Found the solution to this.
Using allOf works for me.
Was just using a diff dependency altogether.
The right one to use for draft07 schema is :
<dependency>
<groupId>com.github.erosb</groupId>
<artifactId>everit-json-schema-jdk6</artifactId>
<version>1.9.2</version>
</dependency>