Why doesn't the applicator meta-schema define "type"?

[ssilverman]

It seems like "type": ["object", "boolean"] is missing.

[Julian]

Which one? Looks present here

[ssilverman]

Oops. I don't know why I put "validation". I meant "applicator".

[handrews]

@ssilverman it was either an accident, or I decided that I wanted the vocabulary schemas to constrain the keywords but not the overall type (deferring that to the dialect meta-schema, meaning the schemas that are not under /meta/ but are instead alongside it). I don't remember, and either way it's not consistent.

[Relequestual]

Given the other schemas in /meta/ have it defined, it makes sense to add it ot the validation vocabulary meta-schema also.
@ssilverman Feel free to PR this.

[Relequestual]

This update needs to be also made for the 2019-09 schemas, and then released to the website.

[karenetheridge]

PR created in #968.

[ssilverman]

@Relequestual I’m confused. This is already a 2019-09 schema? What else needs to change?

[ssilverman]

Ok, I've sorted this out. It's a different branch.

[Relequestual]

This is now resolved.
This change along with a few others have been cherrypicked into a PR against the 2019-09 branch.
Then the 2019-09 submodule for the website has been updated to the latest branch, so everyone can get the new meta-schemas.

[ssilverman]

I believe this issue can be closed.