You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Describe the bug
It is confusing what the minimum string length of an optional field is. By definition, the minimum string length of an optional field should be zero. However, if a value is provided, the minimum string length will by definition change to at least 1. There isn't a way to clearly present that situation now.
In the following example, the null valid value indicates the length could be zero, but the next graphic ([5 .. 10]) seems to contradict that.
Is there a better way to show this condition?
Expected behavior
One simple solution might be to reverse the order and make it "null or string [5 .. 10]".
Or
null
string:
Minimum string length: 5
Maximum string length: 10
Minimal reproducible OpenAPI snippet(if possible)
Screenshots
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Describe the bug
It is confusing what the minimum string length of an optional field is. By definition, the minimum string length of an optional field should be zero. However, if a value is provided, the minimum string length will by definition change to at least 1. There isn't a way to clearly present that situation now.
In the following example, the null valid value indicates the length could be zero, but the next graphic ([5 .. 10]) seems to contradict that.
Is there a better way to show this condition?
Expected behavior
One simple solution might be to reverse the order and make it "null or string [5 .. 10]".
Or
Minimal reproducible OpenAPI snippet(if possible)
Screenshots
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: