I can get dependencies to work with non-nested values (top-level in the schema), but I would like for a dependency to be dependent on a property which is nested within an object definition.
const schema = {
type: "object",
properties: {
start: {
type: "object",
properties: {
time: {
type: "string"
}
}
}
},
dependencies: {
start: {
properties: {
end: {
type: "object",
properties: {
time: {
type: "string"
}
}
}
}
}
}
};
Essentially, I want a way for the dependency to depend not on the start property, but on the start.time property.
I've looked at this issue and the answer states that the schema cannot look "up" the tree, though I am not fully certain what "up" and "down" mean in this context.
The way I see it, if the dependency can depend on start, and time is a property within start, then time is "down" the tree, not "up" (?)
The dependencies keyword exists to simplify the schema for a specific use case. It sacrifices some flexibility and expressiveness for more simple syntax. Although your use case is very similar, it falls outside of what dependencies can do. The good news is that there's a way to do it.
This,
{
"dependencies": {
"some-propery-name": { ... some-schema ... }
}
}
Is equivalent to,
{
"if": { "required": ["some-property-name"] },
"then": { ... some-schema ... }
}
You can extrapolate from there to describe your use case.
{
"if": {
"properties": {
"start": { "required": ["time"] }
},
"required": ["start"]
},
"then": { ... some-schema ... }
}
Related
I am using the following query:
query myOrgRepos {
organization(login: "COMPANY_NAME") {
repositories(first: 100) {
edges {
node {
name
defaultBranchRef {
target {
... on Commit {
history(after: "2021-01-01T23:59:00Z", before: "2023-02-06T23:59:00Z", author: { emails: "USER_EMAIL" }) {
edges {
node {
oid
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
}
But with accurate names for the orginization and emails, and am persistantly getting the following error for every repo.
{
"type": "INVALID_CURSOR_ARGUMENTS",
"path": [
"organization",
"repositories",
"edges",
20,
"node",
"defaultBranchRef",
"target",
"history"
],
"locations": [
{
"line": 10,
"column": 29
}
],
"message": "`2021-01-01T23:59:00Z` does not appear to be a valid cursor."
},
If I remove the after field, it works just fine. However, I kind of need it. Acording to all the docs that I have read both after and before take the same timestamp. Can't tell where I am going wrong here.
I have tried:
to narrow the gap between before and after
return only a single repository
remove after (works fine without it)
I want to validate objects like this
{
type: "user",
data: {id: 1},
}
and
{
type: "account",
data: {uuid: "xxxx"},
}
I thought I can write schema like this
{
type: "object",
properties: {
type: {enum: ["user", "account"]},
data: {
"if": {properties: {type: {const: "user"}}},
"then": {
type: "object",
properties: {
id: {type: "number"}
}
},
"else": {
type: "object",
properties: {
uuid: {type: "string"}
}
},
}
}
}
but it looks like I can't refer to root type field from context of data field. So I have two questions. Can I use if deeper than root? If I can then how to refer to parent or root object from nested object? I'm using node ajv for validation.
You're correct, you cannot apply validation to a different part of your data than where your subschems is being applied. Let me explain a little.
The first thing that happens when processing a JSON Schema is the Schema as a whole is "applied" to the instance as a whole.
properties is an applicator keyword, in that it doesn't assert any validation rules by itself. The VALUES of a properties object are subschemas (which are Schemas in their own right) which are APPLIED to the instance location value when the associated KEY matches.
To give you an exanple, in your Schema, the subschema at properties > type is applied to instance location type, which means the VALUE of the object key type. If type didn't exist in your data, the subschema in your Schema wouldn't do anything (it wouldn't be applied anywhere).
This is broadly the processing model of a Schema against an instance. Hopefully this explains why you can't work in the way you're expecting. However it's still possible to achive what you want.
then and else are conditional applicator keywords, and so need to be applied following the same model.
What you need to do is use if, then, else at the top level, but have deep / nested application of the validation you want to do.
Here's a demo with a new Schema and instance
https://jsonschema.dev/s/sejHF
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"type": {
"enum": [
"user",
"account"
]
},
"data": {}
},
"if": {
"properties": {
"type": {
"const": "user"
}
}
},
"then": {
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"data": {
"properties": {
"id": {
"type": "number"
}
}
}
}
},
"else": {
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"data": {
"properties": {
"uuid": {
"type": "string"
}
}
}
}
}
}
If you also want to make sure that id is present when type is user, then you also need to add required: ['id'] in the then subschema. (You'll need to do similar in the else clause if you want to check for uuid too.
I am trying to define a JSON schema with conditionals. I built an MVE which already doesn't work as I expect it.
The object I want to validate is:
{
"keiner": false,
"abdominal": true,
"zervikal": false
}
The conditional rule is simple. When "keiner" is true, both other values have to be false. If "keiner" is false, at least one of the other two has to be true.
I wrote this schema:
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"keiner": { "type": "boolean" },
"abdominal": { "type": "boolean" }
},
"if": {
"properties": {
"keiner": { "const": true }
}
},
"then": {
"properties" : {
"abdominal": { "const": false },
"zervikal": {"const": false }
}
},
"else": {
"properties": {
"anyOf": [
{ "abdominal": { "const": true } },
{ "zervikal": { "const" : true } }
]
}
}
}
But the Newtonsoft online validator gives the error message
Unexpected token encountered when reading value for 'anyOf'. Expected StartObject, Boolean, got StartArray.
for the line in which ´anyOf´ starts. This confuses me, as all examples I can find show anyOf followed by an array of options.
So what am I doing wrong? Why cannot I have a startArray after anyOf, and how do I write the schema correctly?
I guess this is the schema you are looking for:
My data structure is like this:
firebase-endpoint/updates/<location_id>/<update_id>
each location has many updates that firebase adds as "array" elements.
How can I index on the "validFrom" property of each update if the location_id is unknown before insertion into the databse?
{
"rules": {
"updates": {
"<location_id>": { // WHAT IS THIS NODE SUPPOSED TO BE?
".indexOn": ["validFrom"]
}
}
}
}
data structure sample
{
"71a57e17cbfd0f524680221b9896d88c5ab400b3": {
"-KBHwULMDZ4EL_B48-if": {
"place_id": "71a57e17cbfd0f524680221b9896d88c5ab400b3",
"name": "Gymbox Bank",
"statusValueId": 2,
"update_id": "NOT_SET",
"user_id": "7017a0f5-04a7-498c-9ccd-c547728deffb",
"validFrom": 1456311760554,
"votes": 1
}
},
"d9a02ab407543155d86b84901c69797cb534ac17": {
"-KBHgPkz_buv7DzOFHbD": {
"place_id": "d9a02ab407543155d86b84901c69797cb534ac17",
"name": "The Ivy Chelsea Garden",
"update_id": "NOT_SET",
"user_id": "7017a0f5-04a7-498c-9ccd-c547728deffb",
"validFrom": 1456307547374,
"votes": 0
}
}
}
Update: I don't think this is a dupe of the said question becauase that question doesn't have a parent object with an unknown id as well. ie both <location_id> and <update_id> are free form keys and cannot be set by hand
I did a bit more digging in the docs and I think this should work:
{
"rules": {
"updates": {
"$location_id": { // $location_id should act like a wild card
".indexOn": ["validFrom"]
}
}
}
}
I'd like to specify an analyzer, name it, and use that name in a mapping while creating an index. I'm lost, my ES instance always returns me an error message.
This is, roughly, what I'd like to do:
"settings": {
"mappings": {
"alfedoc": {
"properties": {
"id": { "type": "string" },
"alfefield": { "type": "string", "analyzer": "alfeanalyzer" }
}
}
},
"analysis": {
"analyzer": {
"alfeanalyzer": {
"type": "pattern",
"pattern":"\\s+"
}
}
}
}
But this does not seem to work; the ES instance always returns me an error like
MapperParsingException[mapping [alfedoc]]; nested: MapperParsingException[Analyzer [alfeanalyzer] not found for field [alfefield]];
I tried putting the "analysis" branch of the dictionary at several places (inside the mapping etc.) but to no avail. I guess a working complete example (which I couldn't find up to now) would help me along as well. Probably I'm missing something rather basic.
"analysis" goes in the "settings" block, which goes either before or after the "mappings" block when creating an index.
"settings": {
"analysis": {
"analyzer": {
"alfeanalyzer": {
"type": "pattern",
"pattern": "\\s+"
}
}
}
},
"mappings": {
"alfedoc": { ... }
}
Here's a good complete, example: Example 1