Improve content test for videoId field

[fturmel]

#1655 made me realize that there was an error in the way the video schema was defined, and it was allowing empty videoId to pass the tests.

The check was also updated so that the top-level videoId must be empty or undefined instead of optional when a video is multi-part. It should help avoid confusion and information repetition.

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for codingtrain ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	a50f243
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/codingtrain/deploys/6691a8cd9398a300081d1519
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-1656--codingtrain.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site configuration.

[shiffman]

Hi @fturmel thanks again! Am I confused or is there a mistake in this PR where a bunch of videoIds are removed? Perhaps that is leftover from testing the tests themselves?

[shiffman]

Hi @fturmel thanks again! Am I confused or is there a mistake in this PR where a bunch of videoIds are removed? Perhaps that is leftover from testing the tests themselves?

[fturmel]

No it's intended, sorry I wasn't clear. There's a bug fix and an improvement in there:

• The existing schema validation was supposed to make sure that videoId was required, but the "parts" argument was not destructured from the argument properly. It's basically a Yup library API usage mistake.

• The top-level videoIds removed are all for multi-part videos and were effectively useless. I added a check in the content tests to require them to be undefined or empty when a "parts" array exist. Currently they were optional but you could still put a YouTube ID in that field even if it did nothing.

[shiffman]

Ah, I see! Thank you for the clarification. Would it be more clear to remove the field entirely rather than have it as a blank entry?

[fturmel]

Ah, I see! Thank you for the clarification. Would it be more clear to remove the field entirely rather than have it as a blank entry?

Sure, we can make the check more strict instead of being falsy (which allows undefined, null or empty string). Update incoming.

[fturmel]

Done, the top-level videoId field cannot be present anymore if the video is multi-part.

[shiffman]

Fantastic!