Open jenner opened 8 years ago
I used this to validate complete-valid-example.raml:
sudo npm install -g raml-parser
cat << EOF > check-raml.js
var raml = require('raml-parser');
raml.loadFile('complete-valid-example.raml').then(function(data) {
console.log(data);
}, function(error) {
console.log('Error parsing: ' + error);
});
EOF
node check-raml.js
@jenner sorry for the delayed response.
ramlfications
has the ability for the developer to turn on/off validation when parsing (undocumented - but should be - although can see a test example), as well as adding certain values to be considered valid. Regardless of of complete-valid-example.raml
is or isn't valid, does that answer your main question?
I'll look into complete-valid-example.raml
itself as I work on updating ramlfications
according to my brand-new-but-not-entirely-finished roadmap. It's a good idea to use other parsers (e.g. the one you linked) for sanity checks.
Definitely confirm some inconsistencies. I'm going to move this to the 0.2.0 release.
According to https://github.com/raml-org/raml-js-parser (the RAML reference implementation) the complete-valid-example.raml is not valid at all: misplaced uriParameters, formParameters etc., misformed schema or examples (not strings) and much more. The question is, whether ramlfications should be as strict as possible and comply with 0.8 specs or if it should allow invalid RAML definitions and let the developer decide if those definitions are of any value in the concrete API.
@econchick Thoughts?