I don't understand where "or more" is comming from.
IIUC (and I need not), there's just one top-level json object. If so,
there's 1 ARecord. ARecord has required ID field, thus has 1 ID field. Then
it has second field BRecord, one of them. This Brecord has 2 required
fields, B and C, each should come exactly once. Right?
What I'm after is:
I) valid:
{
"id": "..."
}
II) invalid:
{
"id": "...",
"B": {
}
}
III) valid:
{
"id": "...",
"B": {
"C": "..."
}
}
IV) everything else is invalid.
2017-11-27 15:39 GMT+01:00 Dan Schmitt <dan.schm...@gmail.com>:
> The problem is BRecord can be 0 or more and you still end up with the a
> valid B.
>
> How about
>
> {
> "name" : "ARecord",
> "type" : "record",
> "namespace" : "A",
> "fields" : [
> {"name": "id", "type": "string" },
> {
> "name": "BRecord",
> "type": "record",
> "fields": [
> { "name": "B", "type": "string" },
> { "name": "C", "type": "string" }
> ]
> }
> }
> ]
> }
>
> This gives me 0 or more ARecords, each with and id, and 0 or more BRecords
> associated with each ARecord each with a B and C. If you wanted one or
> more
> C's I don't see a trivial clean way to do that (you could add a
> Cextras array to the
> BRecord to get 0 or more additional C things, but that feels unclean.)
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 9:10 AM, Martin Mucha <alfon...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for reply.
> >
> > Sadly it does not work that way (here). Even:
> >
> > {
> > "name" : "ARecord",
> > "type" : "record",
> > "namespace" : "A",
> > "fields" : [
> > {"name": "id", "type": "string" },
> > {
> > "name": "B",
> > "type": {
> > "type": "record",
> > "name": "BRecord",
> > "fields": [
> > {
> > "name": "C",
> > "type": "string"
> > }
> > ]
> > }
> > }
> > ]
> > }
> >
> > does not require C. And that's not what I want ... I'd like optional B,
> and
> > once user provide B, then B.C is required.
> >
> > Martin.
> >
> >
> > 2017-11-27 15:06 GMT+01:00 Dan Schmitt <dan.schm...@gmail.com>:
> >>
> >> "name": "B",
> >> "type": ["null", {
> >>
> >> The [] union lets you do null or a BRecord, your JSON does null.
> >> Pull the null from the union and it will require the C.
> >>
> >> On Mon, Nov 27, 2017 at 9:00 AM, Martin Mucha <alfon...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I have this avro schema:
> >> >
> >> > {
> >> > "name" : "ARecord",
> >> > "type" : "record",
> >> > "namespace" : "A",
> >> > "fields" : [
> >> > {"name": "id", "type": "string" },
> >> > {
> >> > "name": "B",
> >> > "type": ["null", {
> >> > "type": "record",
> >> > "name": "BRecord",
> >> > "fields": [
> >> > {
> >> > "name": "C",
> >> > "type": "string"
> >> > }
> >> > ]
> >> > }]
> >> > }
> >> > ]
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > and following JSON, which validates against it:
> >> >
> >> > {
> >> > "id": "...",
> >> > "B": {
> >> >
> >> > }
> >> > }
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > I would expect, that C is required. Why it's not? What shall I do to
> >> > make it
> >> > required?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks!
> >> > Martin.
> >
> >
>
