Open Stack

On Thu, 2014-03-20 at 19:34 +1100, Christopher Yeoh wrote:
> On Tue, 18 Mar 2014 19:52:27 +0100
> "Koderer, Marc" <m.koderer at telekom.de> wrote:
> 
> > > Am I missing something or are these schemas being added now just a
> > > subset of what is being used for negative testing? Why can't we
> > > either add the extra negative test info around the new test
> > > validation patches and get the double benefit. Or have the negative
> > > test schemas just extend these new schemas being added?
> > 
> > Yes, the api_schema files should theoretically be a
> > subsets of the negative test schemas.
> > But I don't think that extending them will be possible:
> > 
> > if you have a property definition like this:
> > 
> >         "properties": {
> >             "minRam": {  "type": "integer",}
> > 
> > how can you extend it to:
> > 
> >         "properties": {
> >             "minRam": {
> >                 "type": "integer",
> >                 "results": {
> >                     "gen_none": 400,
> >                     "gen_string": 400
> >                 }
> > 
> > This is the reason why I am unsure how inheritance can solve
> > something here.
> 
> I think this is an example of how we can do some sharing of schema
> definitions when there is sufficient commonality to justify it.

JSON-Schema, for the record, actually does support extending the
definition of the schema using the additionalProperties attribute on a
schema object.

Best,
-jay