Type integer confusing?

[we-zhang]

In the spec, it only list below types:
null,
boolean,
string,
number,
object,
array.

I know number includes integer, but can I define a "type":"integer" explicitly. I mean will this violate the spec?

[handrews]

@Weching "integer" was accidentally left out of that list in draft-wright-jsonschema-00. This is fixed in the next draft, which is currently in final review and should be published in the next week or so.

You should use "type": "integer" as if it were in the list of defined types. It's omission was just an error.

[boxy-robot]

Can we fix this typo? I'm just getting started with json schema and was very confused why everything but the latest official docs reference an integer type.

https://json-schema.org/latest/json-schema-core.html#rfc.section.4.2.1

Edit: Actually, after reading this bit I think I may be more confused now:

As an example, "integer" is a reasonable type for a vocabulary to define as a value for a keyword, but the data model makes no distinction between integers and other numbers.

[handrews]

@yellottyellott what that means is that it's fine that the type keyword includes "integer" as a value, but in terms of the JSON data model as interpreted by JSON Schema, based on the JSON RFC, "integer" is not a distinct type.

You will see in the definition of the type keyword that it notes how "integer" is a special case as well. So the two specification documents are in agreement.

[boxy-robot]

Ah, thanks @handrews. The latter link is what I was looking for.