You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
which is of course because the const keyword was added in draft-06! Since I've seen analogous problems several times now, I wonder if we should make the earlier DraftXValidators emit a warning when they see a keyword which was added in a later draft. That would be:
<= draft04, warn on propertyNames, contains, and const (added in draft06)
<= draft06, warn on if, then, and else (added in draft07)
In draft07, the media keyword was replaced with contentMediaType and contentEncoding, so warnings on both sides could help
I've ignored the string format values, because they explictly permit ignoring unknown values and it's reasonable to think that users might have backported a check - whereas the too-new keywords are almost certainly a programmer error.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I just spent a few minutes digging into a test failure which boiled down to the following:
which is of course because the
const
keyword was added in draft-06! Since I've seen analogous problems several times now, I wonder if we should make the earlierDraftXValidator
s emit a warning when they see a keyword which was added in a later draft. That would be:propertyNames
,contains
, andconst
(added in draft06)if
,then
, andelse
(added in draft07)media
keyword was replaced withcontentMediaType
andcontentEncoding
, so warnings on both sides could helpI've ignored the string
format
values, because they explictly permit ignoring unknown values and it's reasonable to think that users might have backported a check - whereas the too-new keywords are almost certainly a programmer error.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: