Consider an API with an endpoint in which you pass a parameter foo as part of the URL-path, and pass some parameters as json in the body of a POST request.
This uri parameter foo must have one of the values fooBar and fooBaz. Otherwise the request gest a 404.
If the value of foo is fooBar then the body attribute bar is required.
If the value of foo is fooBaz then the body attribute baz is required.
How do I specify a jsonSchema for such an endpoint?
An example for such a request would be:
POST /path/to/endpoint/fooBar HTTP/1.1
Accept: application/json
Content-Type: application/json
Content-Length: 20
{"bar":"something"}
So far I came up with the following based on this and that but I have no idea if this is correct.
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema#",
"id": "http://json-schema.org/draft-03/schema#",
"definitions": {
"foo": { "enum": ["fooBar", "fooBaz"] }
},
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "$ref": "#/definitions/foo" },
"bar": { "type": "string" },
"baz": { "type": "string" }
},
"links": [{
"rel": "self",
"href": "/path/to/endpoint/{foo}",
"hrefSchema": {
"properties": {
"foo": {"$ref": "#/definitions/foo"}
}
}
}],
"anyOf": [
{
"properties": {
"foo": { "enum": ["fooBar"] }
},
"required": ["bar"]
},
{
"properties": {
"foo": { "enum": ["fooBaz"] }
},
"required": ["baz"]
},
]
}
JSON Schema validation is not aware of the URI that the data being validated came from (if any). You can use JSON Hyper-Schema to tell your users how to send that data in the way you expect, but you will still need to do an additional check on the server-side to validate that the request was sent properly.
Before I get into the solution, I want to point out a couple things. Your $schema is set to "draft-03". If you really need "draft-03", this solution won't work. anyOf, allOf and the array form of required were added in "draft-04". hrefSchema was added in "draft-06". Since "draft-06" is brand new and is not well supported yet and you don't need hrefSchema anyway, I'm going to assume "draft-04" ("draft-05" was effectively skipped).
The next thing to mention is that you are using id wrong. It should be the identifier for your schema. You usually don't need this, but if you do, it should be the full URI identifying your schema. That is how my solution uses it.
Last thing before I get into the solution. If you are using the link keyword, you are using JSON Hyper-Schema and your $schema should reflect that. It should have "hyper-schema" instead of "schema" at the end of the URI.
Now the solution. I broke it into two parts, the schema that you put through the validator and the hyper-schema that tells users how to make the request. You've got the first one right. I only fixed the $schema and id.
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
"id": "http://example.com/schema/my-foo-schema",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"foo": { "enum": ["fooBar", "fooBaz"] },
"bar": { "type": "string" },
"baz": { "type": "string" }
},
"anyOf": [
{
"properties": {
"foo": { "enum": ["fooBar"] }
},
"required": ["bar"]
},
{
"properties": {
"foo": { "enum": ["fooBaz"] }
},
"required": ["baz"]
}
]
}
Next is the hyper-schema. You can't reference anything external (href, instance data) in a request schema, but you can write your schema so that it matches your href. The duplication is unfortunate, but that's the way you have to do it.
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/hyper-schema#",
"links": [
{
"rel": "http://example.com/rel/my-foo-relation",
"href": "/path/to/endpoint/fooBar",
"method": "POST",
"schema": {
"allOf": [{ "$ref": "http://example.com/schema/my-foo-schema" }],
"properties": {
"foo": { "enum": ["fooBar"] }
}
}
},
{
"rel": "http://example.com/rel/my-foo-relation",
"href": "/path/to/endpoint/fooBaz",
"method": "POST",
"schema": {
"allOf": [{ "$ref": "http://example.com/schema/my-foo-schema" }],
"properties": {
"foo": { "enum": ["fooBaz"] }
}
}
},
{
"rel": "self",
"href": "/path/to/endpoint"
}
]
}
Usually when I come across something that is difficult to model with hyper-schema, it means that I am doing something overly complicated with my API and I need to refactor. I suggest taking a few minutes to think about alternative designs where this switching on an enum isn't necessary.
Related
Can I put check on two fields in JSON schema ? Both field are of type array of objects. Conditions:
Either one of them can contain value at a time (i.e. other should be empty).
Both can be empty.
Any leads ?
// The schema
var schema = {
"id": "https://kitoutapi.lrsdedicated.com/v1/json_schemas/login-request#",
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
"description": "Login request schema",
"type": "object",
"oneOf": [
{ "categories": {
"maxItems": 0
},
"positionedOffers": {
"minItems": 1
}},
{ "categories": {
"minItems": 1
},
"positionedOffers": {
"maxItems": 0
}}
],
"properties": {
"categories": {
"type": "array"
},
"positionedOffers": {
"type": "array"
}
},
"additionalProperties": false
};
// Test data 1
// This test should return a good result
var data1 = {
"positionedOffers":['hello'],
"categories":[],
}
For your requirement, I think I'd come at this from the other direction. Rather than saying
If one contains a value, the other must be empty, but both may be empty.
I'd say
At least one must be empty.
That leads you to use an anyOf with subschemas checking that each property is an empty array.
{
"id": "https://kitoutapi.lrsdedicated.com/v1/json_schemas/login-request#",
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-04/schema#",
"description": "Login request schema",
"type": "object",
"anyOf": [
{
"properties": {
"categories": {
"maxItems": 0
}
}
},
{
"properties": {
"positionedOffers": {
"maxItems": 0
}
}
}
],
"properties": {
"categories": {
"type": "array"
},
"positionedOffers": {
"type": "array"
}
},
"additionalProperties": false
}
Bonus Material
In your original post, you omitted the properties keywords under the oneOf. This may have been the cause of the schema's failure to validate. I've added it in the above.
Secondly, draft 4 is quite old at this point. You may be limited by the implementation you're using, but if you can, you should consider using a more recent version of JSON Schema. You can view available implementations and what versions they support on the JSON Schema implementations page.
In jsonSchema you can indicate whether defined fields are mandatory or not using the "required" attribute:
{
"$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>
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": { ... }
},
"$ref": "#/definitions/ManifestHistoryItem"
}
Either that or you can just get rid of the definitions wrapper altogether and just have the { ... } part from above.
Effectively what's happening is you've defined an empty schema, which applies no constraints, meaning all instances (data) pass.
I have a jsonschema definition definition-1.json like below. I have a property called inputs of type array which refers anyOf definitions like
"inputs": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"anyOf": [
{
"$ref": "#/definitions/stringParameter"
},
{
"$ref": "#/definitions/numberParameter"
},
{
"$ref": "#/definitions/booleanParameter"
},
{
"$ref": "#/definitions/jsonParameter"
},
{
"$ref": "#/definitions/fileParameter"
}
]
}
}
Then the parameter definitions defined like below in the same jsonschema definition-1.json
"definitions": {
"stringParameter": {
"type": "object",
"required": [
"name",
"description",
"datatype"
]
}
...
}
Now I want to reference this parameter definitions in my other schema dummy-1.json like below
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema",
"$id": "dummy-1.json",
"allOf": [
{
"type": "object",
"required": [
"definition_data"
],
"properties": {
"definition_data": {
"type": "object",
"required": [
"inputs"
],
"properties": {
"type": "array",
"inputs": {
"items": {
"allOf": [
{
"prop1": {
"$ref": "#/definitions/stringParameter"
}
},
{
"prop2": {
"$ref": "#/definitions/numberParameter"
}
}
]
}
}
}
}
}
},
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"definition_data": {
"$ref": "definition-1.json"
}
}
}
]
}
This doesn't looks like working. prop1 will validate successfully for any properties part of other parameter definition too , even though in dummy-1.json I explicitly referred #/definitions/stringParameter .
I can understand inputs in definition-1.json accepts anyOf all parameter definitions. But want to know how we can achieve 1:1 parameter definition mapping for dummy-1.json .
If my understanding is correct, you want to refer from dummy-1.json to subschemas defined in definitions-1.json. To do that, you have to specify the URI of definition-1.json and append the pointer of the subschema in it, like:
dummy-1.json:
{
"$ref": "uri-of-definitions-1.json#/definitions/stringParameter"
}
Note that the URI to be set is quite specific to the json schema library you are using. Usually an absolute https:// URL works, but it isn't always convenient to work with. Maybe a relative path can work for you as well (like ./definition-1.json#/definitions/stringParameter)
For example a schema for a file system, directory contains a list of files. The schema consists of the specification of file, next a sub type "image" and another one "text".
At the bottom there is the main directory schema. Directory has a property content which is an array of items that should be sub types of file.
Basically what I am looking for is a way to tell the validator to look up the value of a "$ref" from a property in the json object being validated.
Example json:
{
"name":"A directory",
"content":[
{
"fileType":"http://x.y.z/fs-schema.json#definitions/image",
"name":"an-image.png",
"width":1024,
"height":800
}
{
"fileType":"http://x.y.z/fs-schema.json#definitions/text",
"name":"readme.txt",
"lineCount":101
}
{
"fileType":"http://x.y.z/extended-fs-schema-video.json",
"name":"demo.mp4",
"hd":true
}
]
}
The "pseudo" Schema note that "image" and "text" definitions are included in the same schema but they might be defined elsewhere
{
"id": "http://x.y.z/fs-schema.json",
"definitions": {
"file": {
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"name": { "type": "string" },
"fileType": {
"type": "string",
"format": "uri"
}
}
},
"image": {
"allOf": [
{ "$ref": "#definitions/file" },
{
"properties": {
"width": { "type": "integer" },
"height": { "type": "integer"}
}
}
]
},
"text": {
"allOf": [
{ "$ref": "#definitions/file" },
{ "properties": { "lineCount": { "type": "integer"}}}
]
}
},
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"name": { "type": "string"},
"content": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"allOf": [
{ "$ref": "#definitions/file" },
{ *"$refFromProperty"*: "fileType" } // the magic thing
]
}
}
}
}
The validation parts of JSON Schema alone cannot do this - it represents a fixed structure. What you want requires resolving/referencing schemas at validation-time.
However, you can express this using JSON Hyper-Schema, and a rel="describedby" link:
{
"title": "Directory entry",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"fileType": {"type": "string", "format": "uri"}
},
"links": [{
"rel": "describedby",
"href": "{+fileType}"
}]
}
So here, it takes the value from "fileType" and uses it to calculate a link with relation "describedby" - which means "the schema at this location also describes the current data".
The problem is that most validators do not take any notice of any links (including "describedby" ones). You need to find a "hyper-validator" that does.
UPDATE: the tv4 library has added this as a feature
I think cloudfeet answer is a valid solution. You could also use the same approach described here.
You would have a file object type which could be "anyOf" all the subtypes you want to define. You would use an enum in order to be able to reference and validate against each of the subtypes.
If the sub-types schemas are in the same Json-Schema file you don't need to reference the uri explicitly with the "$ref". A correct draft4 validator will find the enum value and will try to validate against that "subschema" in the Json-Schema tree.
In draft5 (in progress) a "switch" statement has been proposed, which will allow to express alternatives in a more explicit way.