Re: Actually running our schema against manifest files

On 30 Jun 2020, 01:53 +0200, Marisa DeMeglio <marisa.demeglio@gmail.com>, wrote:
> Yeah totally agree - this is not the same as a processing algorithm implementation. I’ve done that separately.
>
> Do you think there’s any errors the JSON schemas would highlight that’s not covered by the algorithm? I haven’t read them in depth.

That is certainly something to check, the two should be in sync.

Matt, sorry to have assigned these two issues to you, but I have a virtual F2F meeting this week on a totally different WG, so I cannot really commit to look at this:-(


Ivan

>
> Marisa
>
> > On Jun 29, 2020, at 16:48, Matt Garrish <matt.garrish@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Ya, the JSON schemas only provide basic validation, unfortunately, as its not the most robust language. I’ve really only found them useful for editing in a schema-aware program like oxygen, as they help with code completion. As Ivan mentioned, the only robust way to determine conformance is to actually transform a manifest using the algorithm in the spec., in part because data may need to be harvested from elsewhere.
> >
> > Not that we shouldn’t keep them up to date, but I’m not sure where they’ll fit in in an eventual validator.
> >
> > Matt
> >
> > From: Marisa DeMeglio <marisa.demeglio@gmail.com>
> > Sent: June 29, 2020 17:56
> > To: W3C Publishing Working Group <public-publ-wg@w3.org>
> > Subject: Actually running our schema against manifest files
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > After the call today, I decided to try running our JSON-LD schema against some manifest samples. You can try it here:
> >
> > https://marisademeglio.github.io/audiobooks-js/example/schema.html
> >
> > So far I’ve found two things that I think are schema errors (filing issues shortly). Otherwise, nothing to report except this is definitely not a validator, just an experiment, but also, it’s an experiment that will report validation errors. It won’t, however, report validation success.
> >
> > Marisa
>