Skip to content

Conversation

onlinesid
Copy link
Contributor

My pull request #134 was done incorrectly. I've done it on my own separate branch instead of master now.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

typehinting

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's in ConstraintInterface.php the phpdoc here is just inheriting the interface class.

@onlinesid
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm working on a packagist package at the moment: https://packagist.org/packages/onlinesid/json-schema-provider

It's to provide a Service Provider and a validator class for easy use from Silex.

At the moment I have to use an alias (see the part that says dev-sid) because this pull request has been hanging for too long. I might need to start my own or find another fork with more activity.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Following #125 discussion the default case should be empty

The value of this keyword is called a format attribute. It MUST be a string. A format attribute can generally only validate a given set of instance types. If the type of the instance to validate is not in this set, validation for this format attribute and instance SHOULD succeed.
http://json-schema.org/latest/json-schema-validation.html#anchor105

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi @Maks3w , you mean there should not be "$this->addError ..." under "default:" ?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes the whole line must be eliminated. default must be empty

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just for clarify. This is not a bug in your PR. The bug already exists in the upstream code, the reason of modify the line is to prevent (supersede) a git conflict with #125

@onlinesid onlinesid closed this Apr 5, 2015
@keradus
Copy link
Contributor

keradus commented Apr 6, 2015

SAD :(

@onlinesid
Copy link
Contributor Author

I closed this because I had to add few more commits and it screwed up this PR. I've reopened another PR #142

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants