Henry Andrews

OK cool. So the plan is: * ajv PR to add the errors array (do you want me to file an ajv issue or just reference this one?) * ajv-cli...

> so it's still backwards compatible. had kinda wondered about it. OK, good plan :-)

Note that we're now working on standardizing how schemas can be extended. https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/602 is an example. It's working through some particularly complex cases involving newly proposed keywords, and it's a...

@andreineculau sounds good. Wish I could make a PR for this myself but I don't know Erlang and the spec work sucks up all of my JSON Schema time anyway...

@andreineculau the closest to diffs are the release migration notes: http://json-schema.org/specification.html#migrating-from-older-drafts

@mrallen1 / @andreineculau if you're actively interested in attracting contributors for this, I could put this implementation on the "modern" page with a link to this issue. I've started doing...

@rjmill > That's how I read the section on [references to possible non schemas](http://json-schema.org/draft/2019-09/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.8.2.4.4). Seems like a ref to "definitions" (an unknown keyword) would be undefined behavior. Yes, that's correct,...

@Julian > As for the second point, I agree it'd be nice to get to tackling optional, which is why I'd like to get changes merged and out of the...

> The spec says that implementations MUST ignore unrecognized keywords. It's SHOULD ignore up through 2019-09, and then SHOULD collect as annotations in 2020-12 (and if not, SHOULD or MUST...

@Julian given that we're strongly encouraging folks to start using `$schema` and the `$vocabulary` keyword in the referenced meta-schema to control how to process schemas, we should really include this....