allergies: Make exercise schema-compliant

[rbasso]

Related to #625.

[catb0t]

Am I misreading the spec, or doesn't comments go at the top level?

      "canonicalData":
          { "description": "This is the top-level file structure"
          , "type"       : "object"
          , "required"   : ["exercise" , "version", "cases"]
          , "properties" :
                { "exercise" : { "$ref": "#/definitions/exercise"  }
                , "version"  : { "$ref": "#/definitions/version"   }
                , "comments" : { "$ref": "#/definitions/comments"  }
                , "cases"    : { "$ref": "#/definitions/testGroup" }
                }
          , "additionalProperties": false
          },

[rbasso]

We can have comments in the top level, in a test group, or inside a test, so that people can keep them where they fit better. In this case, it is in the test group because it pertains just that group of test.

[catb0t]

That makes sense, thanks

[kotp]

@rbasso is this diving into the "more than just formatting and compliance"?

[rbasso]

@rbasso is this diving into the "more than just formatting and compliance"?

This PR was not supposed to cross that line, @kotp. What is the offending part?

[kotp]

At first glance it appears it is grouping expectations in a different way. I will look closer though.

[rbasso]

I was forced to move the description to comments, because one of them was a list of strings. This also forced me to add other descriptions, because the schema doesn't allow test groups without descriptions (they wouldn't make sense for the student)

[kotp]

That now makes sense.