Jason Desrosiers

> I'd like to see the rules generalized somehow so that non-JS implementations can also be made. That would be nice. However, I don't think the "rules" used by this...

> I feel like this is under-specified, or that determining the specification itself is part of the task (which might be beyond the scope and expectations of a GSoC participant)....

Thanks everyone for showing your interest in this project. > Would you be open to reviewing a draft or suggesting specific features you’d like to see? I will provide one...

> @GANESHSHARMA1 -- I’d also love to hear your thoughts on these steps or any specific priorities you’d like to emphasize. That's all fine, but but it's all very generic...

# Qualification Task There's probably no better way to prepare for a project like this than to implement the JSON Schema output format for yourself. So, that's what the qualification...

> may I suggest that the Verbose format be considered over Detailed? In my experience, trying to figure out which nodes/branches should be retained vs. pruned, especially in an automated...

> what is the deadline for submitting the qualification task? I don't think we've set a deadline for qualification tasks as an organization. I'm willing to accept it as long...

> Should we implement both the Detailed and Basic output formats, or just one of them? Just one. The instructions are "either Basic or Detailed".

**IMPORTANT** Everyone, please re-read the [qualification task description](https://github.com/hyperjump-io/json-schema-lite?tab=readme-ov-file#qualification-task). I've updated it with a clarification of the requirements.

@pradip-1111 > To make sure I’m aligned with the project’s style, could you clarify if there’s a preferred way to handle nested schema validation errors? Are you talking about the...