Add sections of annotation and annotation (keyword) in the glossary

[bhavukkalra]

What kind of change does this PR introduce? As discussed in the issue #266. This PR adds two very similar sections to the glossary section.

Screenshots/videos:

Summary This PR is a part of the individual PR's getting created for completing the glossary page. Used these as a reference to draft the description of these two related sections

• https://json-schema.org/understanding-json-schema/reference/annotations
• https://json-schema.org/draft/2020-12/json-schema-core#name-annotations

Does this PR introduce a breaking change? No

[jdesrosiers]

I generally agree with Greg's review. I don't know what "self-reliant" means in this context. People often use annotation keywords (not annotations) to make a schema "self-documenting", but they're not really using them as annotations in that case. I would describe an annotation as meta-data associated with a particular value in a JSON instance. An annotation keyword is an instruction to the validator on how and where to associate an annotation to the instance. That annotation can be used for all sorts of things. It could even be used for different things depending on the context. So, people using title and description to document their schema ("self-documenting"), they may be using annotation keywords, but they aren't using annotations because the annotation doesn't exist until you apply the schema to an instance.

I'll give a simple example and a more complex one. Here's the simple example.

Given an instance:

{
  "foo": "some value"
}

And a schema:

{
  "type": "object",
  "properties": {
    "foo": {
      "type": "string",
      "title": "Foo"
    }
  }
}

If I apply the schema to the instance, the result is an annotated instance. I'm using a made-up syntax for annotated JSON. Hopefully it makes sense.

{
  "foo": "some value" @title("Foo")
}

The value of /foo is "some value", but that value now has a title annotation attached to it. In theory, you would pass this annotated instance to some process to do something with it that does something with that annotation.

For the more complex example, consider that annotations aren't always just the value of the annotation keyword, they could be computed in some way to get the actual value that will be attached to the instance. Here's a JSON Hyper-Schema example of attaching a link to an instance.

Start by retrieving an instance from an API: https://example.com/api/widgets?page=1

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/json
Link: </schemas/widget-list>; rel="describedby"

{
  "list": [...],
  "page": 1,
  "per-page": 10,
  "next-page": 2
}

The instance identifies the schema that describes it using the "describedby" link, so we need to retrieve the schema as well.

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Content-Type: application/schema+json

{
  "type": "object",
  "properties": {
    "list": { "type": "array" },
    "page": { "type": "integer" },
    "per-page": { "type": "integer" },
    "next-page": { "type": "integer" }
  },
  "links": [
    { "rel": "next", "href": "/api/widgets?page={next-page}" }
  ]
}

Then we apply the schema to the instance to get an annotated instance:

{
  "list": [...],
  "next-page": 2
} @links({ next: "https://example.com/api/widgets?page=2" })

Notice that the resulting meta-data fills in the URI Template and resolves the relative URI against the retrieval URI of the instance. A hyper-schema client can then use that annotated instance to get the next page in the list of widgets using the computed "next" link annotation.

// Get an annotated instance
const widgetList = HyperSchema.get("https://example.com/api/widgets");

// Iterate over the list automatically following "next" links as necessary to get all the widgets.
for await (const widget of HyperSchema.iter(widgetList)) {
  console.log(widget);
}

This is is a fictitious library that I still delude myself that I'll find time to write one day, but it hopefully gives a more concrete example of the kinds of things a hyper-schema client could do with link annotations.

[benjagm]

We did a good progress with the review of this PR. Are you still working on it Bhavuk?

[github-actions[bot]]

Hello! :wave:

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale due to inactivity :sleeping:

It will be closed in 180 days if no further activity occurs. To keep it active, please add a comment with more details.

There can be many reasons why a specific pull request has no activity. The most probable cause is a lack of time, not a lack of interest.

Let us figure out together how to push this pull request forward. Connect with us through our slack channel : https://json-schema.org/slack

Thank you for your patience :heart:

[benjagm]

We are closing this issue due to inactivity. Thanks everyone who was part of the discussions.