Feature/extend joi validation #67
Conversation
| @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ Please file issues for other unsupported features. | |||
| - `refineType(type, format)` - an (optional) function to call to apply to type based on the type and format of the JSON schema. | |||
| - `extensions` - an array of extensions to pass [joi.extend](https://github.com/hapijs/joi/blob/master/API.md#extendextension). | |||
| - `strictMode` - make schemas `strict(value)` with a default value of `false`. | |||
| - `warnOnEmpty` - outputs a warning message on console if a schema is empty or considered empty - https://json-schema.org/latest/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.4.3.1 | |||
| - `extendValidation` - gives the ability to extend the default joi validation schema produced by `enjoi`. Works for the root schema and for references. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Concerned this sounds a lot like joi extensions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It sound similar, but the key is in the details. Maybe it can be called extendJoiSchemas with a bit addition to the description:
extendJoiSchemas- gives the ability to extend the defaultJoivalidation schema produced byEnjoi. Works for the root schema and for referenced ones. In contrast to extensions which extends on a per type level, this options extends on a per schema level. Useful when you want the extend theJoischema produced byEnjoi, without defining a new custom type.
| }, | ||
| extendValidation: { | ||
| '#': Joi.object().keys({title: Joi.string().max(3)}), | ||
| '#/definitions/Name': Joi.string().max(8), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Hard to use this as an example to illustrate why this is useful. Could use currently supported json-schema to specify.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You are right. What do you think about this example:
const schema = Enjoi.schema({
type: 'object',
required: ['min', 'max'],
properties: {
lower: {type: 'number', minimum: 5},
higher: {type: 'number', maximum: 20},
},
}, {
extendValidation: {
'#': Joi.object().keys({
higher: Joi.number().greater(Joi.ref('lower')),
}),
},
});
|
I wonder if the best way to support this is to use the concept of "vendor" extensions. For example: |
|
Maybe, just enable something that lets people have a general catch-all for an |
|
Well the original idea (which was inspired by the needs of our project) was to stay as close to native |
|
I think at this point this needs to be closed. I believe this feature would now be supported by recent merged |
Resolves #65 + some small additions
enjoioptions- an empty schema or one that is considered empty is valid, so the warning should be removable. Refer to https://json-schema.org/latest/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.4.3.1. The default value of the option is left totrueto avoid breaking changes.