Greg Dennis

I think the `compliant_configuration` field suggestion is fine until we can get some kind of compliance report going (it's planned).

I am not aware of any, but my mental catalog is just starting.

I think something about it being a constraint-based system, and as a result, concepts like inheritance do not fit well.

> a validator that has either opt-in or opt-out on that would still be spec-compliant - @ChALkeR The spec says that implementations MUST ignore unrecognized keywords. This needs to be...

> Your implementation doesn't allow explicitly choosing which version to apply? Quite the opposite. If you specify with `$schema`, it applies at that draft. But if you don't, it makes...

> The idea that `$schema` is a needless formality has significantly degraded the usefulness of the keyword to the point that many implementations outright ignore it and just default to...

What are "bignum" tests testing? Is this a requirement of JSON Schema or of JSON compatibility?

> It tests support for arbitrary-precision decimals, as opposed to binary64 numbers (i.e. a double-precision float like ECMAScript uses). Support for arbitrary-precision numbers is required by JSON, not JSON Schema....

No... I don't test the ability to add numbers with the `+` operator in .net. It's inherent. This test suite is supposed to test JSON Schema. Anything that isn't supported...

> I'm not sure I follow your argument then The examples you showed aren't testing the JSON, per se. They're testing the schema's ability to match and compare JSON values...