An AssetHyperlink class did exist, but wasn't used in ContentJsonConverter. This would be technically a breaking change. The reason why we would prefer this way is to avoid having to deal with strange patternmatchings on AssetStructure while the expected type should actually be AssetHyperlink. Added a new renderer for good measure (we don't actually use this renderer, but the tests failed, so it felt appropiate)
@Roblinde
An
AssetHyperlink
class did exist, but wasn't used inContentJsonConverter
. This would be technically a breaking change. The reason why we would prefer this way is to avoid having to deal with strange patternmatchings onAssetStructure
while the expected type should actually beAssetHyperlink
. Added a new renderer for good measure (we don't actually use this renderer, but the tests failed, so it felt appropiate) @Roblinde