Jason Desrosiers

This was previously discussed in https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/1077. We decided to extend `contains` to also apply to objects. Later, we changed our minds and decided to go with a separate keyword. More...

Thanks for the suggestion. There's definitely a gap here, but I think we'd probably need a different solution than the one suggested. In case it isn't known, the workaround you...

> If you put an `else: false` on all of them, then I imagine you could probably do an `anyOf`, but that seems tedious. Unfortunately, that doesn't work. The `anyOf`...

> the only way I can imagine to make anyOf work is to repeat the previous conditions in later conditionals Agreed. > I agree that a shortcircuited version of allOf...

> We're trying to fit an imperative tool into a functional box. `if`/`then`/`else` is a bit awkward in JSON Schema, but its design is based on the same boolean logic...

It might be relevant to point out the `propertyDependencies` keyword that's expected to be included in a future release of JSON Schema. ```json { "propertyDependencies": { "foo": { "a": {...

> The schema for `elseIf` would need to explicitly be an array of objects containing only `if` and `then` properties. We've avoided structured keywords like this in the past. That's...

If someone has better words suggest that they think are more clear, I'm open to that, but I think the spec already says everything it needs to say.

> We already have the _cross-draft.json_ tests in the optional directories, but they test changing drafts through a `$ref` rather than being embedded. The whole point of redefining `$id` as...

> can the current test structure support a meta-schema validation (as opposed to just a schema validation of data that happens to also be a schema)? I don't think it...