Skip to content

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

Closed
cdunklau opened this issue Jul 29, 2019 · 1 comment
Closed

Validator class workflows should be mentioned in usage docs #590

cdunklau opened this issue Jul 29, 2019 · 1 comment
Labels
Enhancement Some new desired functionality

Comments

@cdunklau
Copy link
Contributor

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.

@Julian
Copy link
Member

Julian commented Nov 1, 2022

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.

@Julian Julian closed this as completed Nov 1, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Enhancement Some new desired functionality
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants