feat: add format validation

[tatomyr]

What/Why/How?

Added JSON Schema format validation.

NB: use the same version of ajv-formats as in other products to avoid conflicts.

Reference

Resolves #766

Related: #386

Testing

• Add an e2e test.
• Test in the browser env

Screenshots (optional)

Check yourself

• Code changed? - Tested with redoc/reference-docs/workflows (internal)
• All new/updated code is covered with tests
• New package installed? - Tested in different environments (browser/node)

Security

• Security impact of change has been considered
• Code follows company security practices and guidelines

[changeset-bot]

🦋 Changeset detected

Latest commit: b004a0b

The changes in this PR will be included in the next version bump.

This PR includes changesets to release 2 packages

Name	Type
@redocly/openapi-core	Minor
@redocly/cli	Minor

Not sure what this means? Click here to learn what changesets are.

Click here if you're a maintainer who wants to add another changeset to this PR

[github-actions]

Command	Mean [ms]	Min [ms]	Max [ms]	Relative
redocly lint packages/core/src/benchmark/benches/rebilly.yaml	979.5 ± 12.8	957.7	995.5	1.00
redocly-next lint packages/core/src/benchmark/benches/rebilly.yaml	994.8 ± 16.6	961.6	1016.1	1.02 ± 0.02

[github-actions]

Coverage report

St.❔	Category	Percentage	Covered / Total
🟡	Statements	78.63%	5049/6421
🟡	Branches	67.28%	2056/3056
🟡	Functions	73.13%	833/1139
🟡	Lines	78.92%	4763/6035

Test suite run success

835 tests passing in 120 suites.

Report generated by 🧪jest coverage report action from b004a0b

[jeremyfiel]

while most of these are valid format assertions, just for future reference, the package ajv-formats was created for JSON Schema Draft-07, only. There may be additional formats available in future versions of JSON Schema, which are associated with OAS 3.1.x's use of JSON Schema 2020-12.

Also of note, OAS 3.x.0 depends on JSON Schema Draft-04, which does not define some of the formats used in later versions, such as Draft-07 or later.

[tatomyr]

Thanks for the clarification @jeremyfiel. I'm still testing this solution.

[jeremyfiel]

this draft pr was auto-merged with the snapshot label.

is this supposed to be included?

[tatomyr]

is this supposed to be included?

That was only for testing purposes. Nothing was really merged. Please disregard that.

[tatomyr]

Closing it in favour of #2172.