Tight validation : opt-in vs. opt-out #1
Description
Per opws/opws-dataset#146 (comment):
I don't want to force this on validation by default, but I do want to have it be part of accepting a pull request.
Right now, it is forced on validation by default (to be opted out of via --loose).
And I kind of feel like that's the correct behavior, honestly, considering this tool's use case: to allow authors to ensure that they've written a profile correctly. If they've written it incorrectly, by using the wrong name for a field, then --loose is not going to catch the bug, and the validator's default behavior has been basically useless.
It's not like this is saying that extended profiles are invalid - they still match the schema, after all. It's just that validating properties outside the schema is outside the scope of this validator, so, if they're present, yeah, we reject it.