You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently the structure of index maps are described in the spec like this:
It shares the version and file field from the regular source map, but gains a new sections field.
This makes it clear that version, file (optionally), and sections fields are present in an index map. What's not explicitly spelled out is if this excludes other fields such as mappings or sources in the top-level map or if that falls under "unrecognized properties", and if it must be an index map if a sections field exists.
In practice, implementations I've seen will check if the sections field is present and decide whether it's intended to be an index map based on that (and ignoring extra entries that are irrelevant to an index map). Maybe the spec can just codify this behavior?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently the structure of index maps are described in the spec like this:
This makes it clear that
version
,file
(optionally), andsections
fields are present in an index map. What's not explicitly spelled out is if this excludes other fields such asmappings
orsources
in the top-level map or if that falls under "unrecognized properties", and if it must be an index map if asections
field exists.In practice, implementations I've seen will check if the
sections
field is present and decide whether it's intended to be an index map based on that (and ignoring extra entries that are irrelevant to an index map). Maybe the spec can just codify this behavior?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: