Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

CIP-0010 | Add schema links #838

Open
Godspeed-exe opened this issue Jun 6, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

CIP-0010 | Add schema links #838

Godspeed-exe opened this issue Jun 6, 2024 · 2 comments

Comments

@Godspeed-exe
Copy link
Contributor

Hello guys!

As mentioned on my previous PR over the weekend I would like to add a schema attribute to the registry.json file. Initially as an optional attribute.

Problem today

Currently there is no way for anyone (or a machine / script / application) to know which CIP (actual documentation of a metadata standard) is connected to which metadata label. Or vice versa: if you look at metadata label 721, how do you know that you can find it's details in CIP-0025?

Proposed solution

  • Add optional schema attribute to registry.json
  • Adjust the JSON validator schema of registry.json
  • This new value should point to the location of a JSON validator schema inside the CIP

Another solution would be to just point to the CIP folder and put the validators on a fixed position. (CIP-?????/schema_validators)
Perhaps it's wise to make schema an array, in case there are updates / new versions which are also linked to this metadata label.

What do you think?

@rphair rphair changed the title CIP-0010 - Adding schema links CIP-0010 | Add schema links Jun 6, 2024
@Crypto2099
Copy link
Collaborator

Interesting and I am in favor of the proposed change to start using CI/CD actions to validate that, particularly things like our registry CIPs, are being updated correctly by the authors.

There is an interesting point about versioning of some schemes but I think that might be overkill as generally speaking you probably just want a top-level pointer to say: This one goes to CIP-25 and going to that branch in its current state should be sufficient. Since the rest of the CIP repository is not "machine readable" in general anyway I think there will always be some amount of "human intervention" required.

@Godspeed-exe
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hello @Crypto2099

Fully agree, my proposal is only focused on CIP-0010 metadata label entries.

Mostly trying to improve: "Where does an application that uses these metadata labels find the correct matching schema definition (in the stack of all CIP's). Currently there is no (machine readable or human) link between CIP0025 and metadata label 721) and how can it validate it."

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants