-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 590
Validator class workflows should be mentioned in usage docs #590
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
Comments
Ages later, there's still poor separation (API docs interspersed in narrative docs) but that's more now a question of writing more/better narrative docs, as we do indeed now have a separate API reference here and also mention validator classes in the docs for validate. TL;DR: docs still wonky in places and need improving, but this specific issue may be covered now. Feedback or help of course very welcome. |
I was looking for a way to do what
jsonschema.validators.validator_for
does, but didn't find it in the initial "basic usage" section. A band-aid could be to expand the basic usage documentation (say, where it points out "If you know you have a valid schema already...")....however I must say I was confused by the layout of the docs. The table of contents seems to imply a more narrative style, but the docs intersperse prose with generated API documentation. I think a cleaner separation of narrative and API docs (with appropriate cross-references) could be more friendly and effective.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: