feat!: allow multi format schemas by smoya · Pull Request #370 · asyncapi/spec-json-schemas

smoya · 2023-03-31T12:09:19Z

Description

This PR contains all the required changes for the following new Spec v3.0.0 feature asyncapi/spec#622.
A WIP PR containing changes on the spec has been created by @GreenRover.

The changes made in this PR apply to:

Message Payload (including examples) both in the root document and in components.
Schemas in components

Related issue(s)
asyncapi/spec#622

github-advanced-security · 2023-03-31T12:10:56Z

You have successfully added a new SonarCloud configuration ``. As part of the setup process, we have scanned this repository and found no existing alerts. In the future, you will see all code scanning alerts on the repository Security tab.

GreenRover · 2023-04-03T07:41:59Z

Thx smoja, i totaly like it!

GreenRover · 2023-04-04T05:21:55Z

I found a point. The MessagePayloadObject can not be fined below components. Can you add this.

sonarqubecloud · 2023-04-25T05:01:52Z

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

jonaslagoni · 2023-06-12T16:52:33Z

@smoya I am assuming you continue this when you get back the 19 th, otherwise let me know so I can help push this over the finish line 🙂

smoya · 2023-06-22T22:23:05Z

@smoya I am assuming you continue this when you get back the 19 th, otherwise let me know so I can help push this over the finish line 🙂

You are right assuming this. I'm gonna work on this.

smoya · 2023-06-22T22:53:23Z

I found a point. The MessagePayloadObject can not be fined below components. Can you add this.

@GreenRover Sorry for the delay, but I can't find where we discussed about having those under components. We already have schemas so what's the need for adding this new wrapper under components as well?

cc @derberg @jonaslagoni

jonaslagoni · 2023-06-24T13:54:04Z

definitions/3.0.0/messagePayloadObject.json

+      }
+    ],
+    "$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-07/schema#",
+    "$id": "http://asyncapi.com/definitions/3.0.0/messagePayloadObject.json"


I would call it something similar to MultiFormatSchemaObject that is unrelated to payload.

jonaslagoni · 2023-06-24T13:55:18Z

@GreenRover Sorry for the delay, but I can't find where we discussed about having those under components. We already have schemas so what's the need for adding this new wrapper under components as well?

components.schemas needs to change as well yea 🙂

jonaslagoni · 2023-06-24T13:56:21Z

definitions/3.0.0/messageObject.json

+          "payload": {
+            "$ref": "http://asyncapi.com/definitions/3.0.0/messagePayloadObject.json"
+          }


This needs to be a union of the schema+format, just schema, or reference.

smoya · 2023-06-26T08:30:58Z

@jonaslagoni I made the changes you suggested. Additionally, I removed the object suffix as I don't find it necessary anymore.
The multiFormatSchemas are added into the schemas.json now.

BTW, I tested the compiled schema but I expected the following to give an error because the schema is not a valid avro but it doesn't. I will check the reason why.

https://www.jsonschemavalidator.net/s/aSOFbwxD

GreenRover · 2023-06-26T09:12:33Z

@GreenRover Sorry for the delay, but I can't find where we discussed about having those under components. We already have schemas so what's the need for adding this new wrapper under components as well?

components.schemas needs to change as well yea 🙂

There is no direct need. May be reusability.
But we never discussed this fact.

GreenRover · 2023-06-28T12:55:26Z

definitions/3.0.0/multiFormatSchema.json

+          "required": [
+            "schemaFormat"
+          ],
+          "properties": {


I miss a section that will allow protobuff, xsd or other string based schemas?

If we need to add official support for protobuf, indeed this should be done inside this document by adding a new "if" section. But afaik Otherwise, it is still supported since the schema for the object itself allows it since the schema has no JSON Schema definition:

"properties": { "schemaFormat": { "type": "string" }, "schema": {} },

Meaning the following should be valid:

"components": { "schemas": { "myProtobufSchema": { "schemaFormat": "application/vnd.google.protobuf;version=3", "schema": "message Point {\n required int32 x = 1;\n required int32 y = 2;\n optional string label = 3;\n}\n\nmessage Line {\n required Point start = 1;\n required Point end = 2;\n optional string label = 3;\n}\n" } } }

the "schema": {} is the same as "schema": true, so everything is allowed. Also stringed protobuf schema.

Testing, I noticed there is a bug somewhere in my current implementation where it is allowed to set a string schema even when setting the schemaFormat to be an AsyncAPI schema.

The following example demonstrates it; where the testinline schema appears as invalid (as I expect) but the test schema is valid (unexpected).

{ "asyncapi": "3.0.0", "info": { "title": "Example", "version": "0.1.0" }, "components": { "schemas": { "test": { "schemaFormat": "application/vnd.aai.asyncapi+json;version=3.0.0", "schema": "message Point {\n required int32 x = 1;\n required int32 y = 2;\n optional string label = 3;\n}\n\nmessage Line {\n required Point start = 1;\n required Point end = 2;\n optional string label = 3;\n}\n" }, "testInline": "message Point {\n required int32 x = 1;\n required int32 y = 2;\n optional string label = 3;\n}\n\nmessage Line {\n required Point start = 1;\n required Point end = 2;\n optional string label = 3;\n}\n" } } }

Open in JSON Schema validator

I don't get why since both are validating against schema.json. I will need to check what's the issue about.

@smoya remember to change the components to be anySchema.json not schema.json 😄

definitions/3.0.0/anySchema.json

jonaslagoni · 2023-06-29T12:08:20Z

definitions/3.0.0/multiFormatSchema.json

+          "required": [
+            "schemaFormat"
+          ],
+          "properties": {


@smoya remember to change the components to be anySchema.json not schema.json 😄

definitions/3.0.0/schemas.json

jonaslagoni

One comment

definitions/3.0.0/components.json

smoya · 2023-06-29T16:27:16Z

@jonaslagoni I had to add this change in order to allow values such as bool to be valid schemas when matched with multiFormatSchema.json. Otherwise, the following will be invalid:

"components": {
    "schemas": {
      "test": true,
      "test2": {
        "schema": true
      },
      "test3": {
        "schemaFormat": "application/vnd.aai.asyncapi;version=3.0.0",
        "schema": true
      }
    }
  }

Do you believe there is a better/smarter way of doing that?

jonaslagoni

Nice 👌

fmvilas · 2023-07-03T15:36:32Z

definitions/3.0.0/anySchema.json

@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+{
+  "allOf": [


Is allOf needed here? 🤔

Nice catch. Removed!

…Schemas

fmvilas

🚢 🇮🇹

sonarqubecloud · 2023-07-13T15:11:02Z

Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!

0 Bugs
0 Vulnerabilities
0 Security Hotspots
0 Code Smells

No Coverage information
No Duplication information

smoya · 2023-07-13T19:30:50Z

/rtm

asyncapi-bot · 2023-07-13T19:33:43Z

🎉 This PR is included in version 6.0.0-next-major-spec.2 🎉

The release is available on:

Your semantic-release bot 📦🚀

feat!: allow defining message schemaFormat at message level

148d087

smoya force-pushed the feat/allowSchemas branch from 4525afc to 148d087 Compare March 31, 2023 12:10

smoya mentioned this pull request Mar 31, 2023

Proposal to allow defining schema format other than default one (AsyncAPI Schema) asyncapi/spec#622

Closed

Merge branch 'next-major-spec' into feat/allowSchemas

7c0702e

jonaslagoni mentioned this pull request Jun 12, 2023

Work on 3.0 release asyncapi/spec#691

Closed

Merge branch 'next-major-spec' into feat/allowSchemas

bfa04f3

jonaslagoni reviewed Jun 24, 2023

View reviewed changes

smoya marked this pull request as ready for review June 26, 2023 08:19

smoya requested review from asyncapi-bot-eve, char0n, dalelane, derberg and fmvilas as code owners June 26, 2023 08:19

smoya requested a review from jonaslagoni June 26, 2023 08:19

smoya force-pushed the feat/allowSchemas branch from 06fdc55 to 8abbd11 Compare June 26, 2023 08:21

smoya force-pushed the feat/allowSchemas branch from 8abbd11 to 447397b Compare June 26, 2023 08:32

renaming + adding to components

359b935

smoya force-pushed the feat/allowSchemas branch from 447397b to 359b935 Compare June 26, 2023 08:33

update tests

a92fc1e

smoya mentioned this pull request Jun 28, 2023

AsyncAPI spec v3 support in parser-js asyncapi/parser-js#780

Closed

4 tasks

GreenRover reviewed Jun 28, 2023

View reviewed changes

jonaslagoni requested changes Jun 29, 2023

View reviewed changes

fix components schemas + review issues

cacbbce

smoya requested review from GreenRover and jonaslagoni June 29, 2023 13:57

jonaslagoni requested changes Jun 29, 2023

View reviewed changes

definitions/3.0.0/components.json Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

jonaslagoni mentioned this pull request Jun 29, 2023

feat: add all recommended and must supported schema formats #365

Merged

smoya added 3 commits June 29, 2023 17:28

allow reference in componentes schemas

be4bb63

simplify if/else adding the then

bf316fa

allow no objects to be schemas

266fd07

smoya requested a review from jonaslagoni June 30, 2023 09:20

jonaslagoni approved these changes Jun 30, 2023

View reviewed changes

fmvilas requested changes Jul 3, 2023

View reviewed changes

smoya added 3 commits July 12, 2023 17:57

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/next-major-spec' into feat/allow…

bb91012

…Schemas

update 3.0.0-without-.json

1826d4c

remove allOf as non-needed

a0823b1

smoya requested a review from fmvilas July 13, 2023 14:27

fmvilas approved these changes Jul 13, 2023

View reviewed changes

asyncapi-bot added the ready-to-merge label Jul 13, 2023

asyncapi-bot merged commit 6367e1d into asyncapi:next-major-spec Jul 13, 2023

asyncapi-bot added the released on @next-major-spec label Jul 13, 2023

smoya deleted the feat/allowSchemas branch July 13, 2023 20:58

This was referenced Jun 5, 2023

AsyncAPI spec v3 support in JSON Schema files #400

Closed

[v3] Support multi format schemas in message headers asyncapi/spec#948

Closed

derberg mentioned this pull request Oct 10, 2023

fix: examples of messages should not follow json schema #434

Merged

Uh oh!

Comments

Conversation

smoya commented Mar 31, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

github-advanced-security bot commented Mar 31, 2023

Uh oh!

GreenRover commented Apr 3, 2023

Uh oh!

GreenRover commented Apr 4, 2023

Uh oh!

sonarqubecloud bot commented Apr 25, 2023

Uh oh!

jonaslagoni commented Jun 12, 2023

Uh oh!

smoya commented Jun 22, 2023

Uh oh!

smoya commented Jun 22, 2023

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jonaslagoni commented Jun 24, 2023

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

smoya commented Jun 26, 2023

Uh oh!

GreenRover commented Jun 26, 2023

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jonaslagoni Jun 28, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jonaslagoni left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

smoya commented Jun 29, 2023 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jonaslagoni left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

fmvilas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

sonarqubecloud bot commented Jul 13, 2023

Uh oh!

smoya commented Jul 13, 2023

Uh oh!

asyncapi-bot commented Jul 13, 2023

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

5 participants

smoya commented Mar 31, 2023 •

edited

Loading

jonaslagoni Jun 28, 2023 •

edited

Loading

smoya commented Jun 29, 2023 •

edited

Loading