required based on field condition

[whyvez]

I am running into some cases where required is based on some field conditions. I started using the example below as a strategy.

example:

{
  "name": "sapling_plot_shape",
  "type": "string",
  "constraints": {
    "pattern": "/^(C|R|S)$/"
  }
},
{
  "name": "sapling_tagging_limit_dbh",
  "type": "number",
  "constraints": {
    "required": "sapling_plot_area > 0",
    "minimum": 0.1,
    "maximum": 12.0
  }
},
{
  "name": "sapling_tagging_limit_height",
  "type": "number",
  "constraints": {
    "required": "sapling_plot_area > 0",
    "minimum": 1.3,
    "maximum": 20.0
  }
}

[rufuspollock]

WONTFIX.

So I think this is a really nice example of extending the spec but I don't think it will go in "officially" for the present given that there is a lot of complexity and need may be limited. So: please keep doing this and inform us how the pattern works out - we just won't make it official and require tool implementors to support.

My one suggestion at the moment is to maybe re name "required" where it is conditional to "requiredComplex" or something so you don't end up over-writing the official required field.

[loco-philippe]

To respond to Peter's comment in camtrap-dp#32, I can formalize a new recipe (e.g. relationships) based on the solution detailed in the notebook shared in #859.

Do you agree with this proposal?

@roll : If yes, should this be formalized by a pattern modification (by a PR) ?

[roll]

cc @peterdesmet