Also I'm facing the same issue when I have a virtual property using a getter:

    /*     
     * @ApiProperty(
     *     required=true
     * )
     */
    public function getSomething()
    {
    }

This won't set the property to required due to the 4 lines of code I'm removing.

Failing tests are unrelated.

I'm unsure about this, what you say makes sense, wdyt @api-platform/core-team ?

@soyuka is there anything I can do (more explanations, implementation change, ...) to get some feedback and know if this branch can/will be merged in the future?

Thanks!

I agree with this code, I'm just afraid that such change could break some implementations... I'd like to understand why we would need writable here as well.

Isn't the issue the assumption of nullability if the property is not required?
This PR is also related: #3518
We only have the specification of JSON Schema to understand it (https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-bhutton-json-schema-validation-00#section-6.5.3):

An object instance is valid against this keyword if every item in the array is the name of a property in the instance.

It only says that the property may not appear, not that it is nullable.

But I think you are right to say that if a property is always normalized, then it should probably be required.

This bug also leads to the wrong documentation when constructor property promotion is used.

For example:

<?php

namespace App\Customer\ApiResource;

use ApiPlatform\Core\Annotation\ApiProperty;
use ApiPlatform\Core\Annotation\ApiResource;
use Symfony\Component\Validator\Constraints\NotBlank;

#[ApiResource(
    collectionOperations: ['post'],
    itemOperations: [],
)]
class Book
{
    public function __construct(
        #[NotBlank]
        #[ApiProperty(identifier: true)]
        protected string $name,
    ) {
    }

    public function getName(): string
    {
        return $this->name;
    }
}

Here the name property is required and ApiPlatform can set it. But in the documentation, this property is not marked as "required" because it's not writable.

It's been a while since this PR was created but the issue is still actual. Especially with properties set from constructors in our use case. @soyuka what is required to continue working on this issue? Please let us know if you want a fresh PR for the current version to be created.

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.