My $0.02: I'm pro-validation but ambivalent about JSON Schema specifically. However it should be straightforward for the auth server to convert from JSON Schema to Joi validation objects via, e.g. https://www.npmjs.com/package/enjoi, provided we can stick to the subset that is implemented there (or wherever).
On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 8:13 AM, Mark Hammond <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > Edouard has been working on adding payloads to our push messages and we > were having a bit of a discussion about how to define these payloads. This > is becoming relevant to FxA and to Sync, hence I'm copying both lists. > > When defining the data in a payload for a certain message, both the server > and the client must agree on the format. Initially we can manage this in an > ad-hoc basis, but I'm not sure this scales particularly well. > > Somewhat inspired by the new telemetry data pipeline, I'm wondering if we > should consider moving towards using JSONSchema (json-schema.org) to > define our payloads? The benefits I see here are: > > * A single format that the client and server can use to describe and agree > on the data being exchanged. We'd need to agree on a canonical location for > a single schema that the client and server agree on, but that's probably > doable. > > * Eventually unit tests on both the client and server could use this > schema to validate the messages they send (or expect to receive). This > would also be useful when mocking - eg, unit tests in the browser could > confirm that the mocked data (ie, data we pretend came from the server) > also conforms to the schema, to help validate that we are indeed testing > data that looks like what the server actually sends. > > * All data can be validated without knowing the contents of the message. > > * All messages are likely to be somewhat consistent, given someone will > need to define the schema and will use as reference other existing schemas. > > This is somewhat aspirational (ie, I'm not suggesting we would do all that > work up-front), but there's already a bug on file to perform client-side > schema validations for telemetry (bug 1249925) and we could possibly > piggy-back off that work for the client side. > > Does anyone think this is worthwhile, or am I over-thinking the problem at > hand and ad-hoc management of the payload definitions is OK? > > Cheers, > > Mark > _______________________________________________ > Dev-fxacct mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-fxacct >
_______________________________________________ Sync-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/sync-dev
