Open deiteris opened 3 years ago
given example A
types:
foo:
type: object
properties:
bar: string
if the following, example B
...
baz:
type: foo
is the same as, example C
...
baz:
type: !insert-the-definition-of-what-folllows foo
then example C would expand to the following, example D.
...
baz:
type:
type: object
properties:
bar: string
which is, like you observed, a construction that passes validation. It seems to me only an issue to a non-conformant, naive RAML processor.
Hi 👋
When working with AMF parser, I've discovered that the following RAML passes the validation (https://github.com/aml-org/amf/issues/1085):
Here's what the current version of specification says:
While points a) and b) are clear, the point c) here puzzles me since it creates a loophole that allows a user to create an infinite type declaration, or confusing constructions involving deprecated
schema
node:Is it done on purpose? What is the point of allowing an inline type declaration inside a type?