Jason Desrosiers

I put some thought into this and this was the best I could come up with. ```json [ { "description": "readOnly generates its value as an annotation", "schema": { "$schema":...

I wonder if the best thing to do is just to include the full expected output result for the evaluation. Test harnesses would have to write code to compare it...

I didn't think about that one. That's another thing is couldn't express. > Not sure if we're over-engineering this. I don't thing there's a simple solution here. No matter what...

@Relequestual Have a closer look at that example I posted. It's not testing the validation behavior of a bundled schema. It's testing the bundling process itself. Given a "schema" and...

> Worth remembering that the keys in `$defs` can be anything unique and don't have to be the schema resource's `$id`. Yep. I have an option that let's users change...

> The original post has a problem in that it maintains the original `$id` value, meaning that the original schema and the bundled schema have the same `$id`, which is...

> In your example, you've added `$defs`, which is _changing_ the schema. You therefore have a different schema. [...] They're semantically equivalent, but they are not the same thing. That's...

> The intent, at least from me, was to be able to use the bundled and unbundled version of a schema interchangibly. That was my intent as well. I think...

> Given @gregsdennis interpretation is reasonable, and the solution (as in, Greg's approach to bundling schemas) is reasonable and conformant to the spec, let's make the tests follow this approach?...

> I think I also didn't think about the fact that these will be a new class of tests as opposed to tests that can be run with the current...