Security: Fix markdown and add external property restriction for "to" #329
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Signed-off-by: Meret Behrens <meret.behrens@tngtech.com>
…ity relationships Signed-off-by: Meret Behrens <meret.behrens@tngtech.com>
goneall
approved these changes
May 12, 2023
puerco
approved these changes
May 14, 2023
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for catching this @meretp.
I am surprised and not very happy about the minCount:0 cardinality of to. Having it optional challenges the idea of a relationship itself :/ At least this makes sure we don't get an incomplete assessment.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Looking at the generated documentation fro the model, I noticed that the property
security:withdrawnisn't assigned correctly. This was caused by the wrong title in the markdown file forwithdrawnTime.The
toproperty forRelationshipis optional since #293. From the descriptions in the security relationships I think thetoproperty should be mandatory for all security relationships.