I created a simple logic app triggered by sending a json payload and I need to retrieve a value of a property in order to use it in a condition scope.
Thanks for you help
Please use Parse Json action, please click Use sample payload to generate schema, and then paste your json to generate the schema needed to parse the json:
Then select the key of the value you want to get
===============update=============================
I defined a json string as input.
According to the json string you provided, the generated schema should look like this：
{
"properties": {
"CusttId": {
"type": "string"
},
"Direction": {
"type": "string"
},
"MyId": {
"type": "string"
},
"Reason": {
"type": "string"
},
"TestDateTime": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"type": "object"
}
I did a test and it can retrieve MyId:
Related
I have LogicApp which get HTTP Post from Azure Alerts.
I would like to create "DimensionNames" string variable, which includes all names in array.
DimensionNames value could be "name1,name2, name3, name4".
Finally I would use DimenstionNames string in "call Webhook".
How do it?
Request Body Json in "When a HTTP request is received"
{
"dimensions": {
"items": {
"properties": {
"name": {
"type": "string"
},
"value": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"required": [
"name",
"value"
],
"type": "object"
},
"type": "array"
}
}
Using variables and Join action you can convert array to a string variable. I have reproduced from my side and below are steps I followed,
Created an alert and configured a HTTP trigger logic app to it.
Designer of logic app will be,
The payload of http request is,
{
"dimensions": {
"items": {
"properties": {
"name": {
"type": "string"
},
"value": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"required": [
"name",
"value"
],
"type": "object"
},
"type": "array"
}
}
4. Next taken Initialize variable action as shown below,
Taken Join action to divide values from array with comma,
Next taken another initialize variable action to store value as a string,
In webhook action the value of string variable is used as body,
Outputs are shown below,
Http trigger:
Output of initialize variable,
Output if Join,
Output of initialize variable 2,
Reference link
I am having a Azure logic app where I want to iterate over a dictionary as shown below.
"test": {"text1":"qabdstw1234",
"text2":"vhry46578"
},
Here, in my Logic app I am able to iterate over a list of dictionary but here I want to iterate over a dictionary.
Does anybody knows how to do it?
I have used parse JSON inorder to fetch test1 data from the JSON which you have provided and then used compose connector to get the same. Here is my Logic app :-
Here is the generated schema while using the sample JSON Payload which you have provided I'm using:-
{
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"title": {
"type": "string"
},
"text1": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"id": {
"type": "string"
},
"status": {
"type": "string"
}
}
}
Add a new action, search for Control and select the For each:
To process an array in your logic app, you can create a "Foreach" loop. This loop repeats one or more actions on each item in the array.
Source: Create loops that repeat workflow actions or process arrays in Azure Logic Apps
Here's my json - Here I want to retrieve json content from "Property - Dynamic content". Where, dynamic content part might vary for every json request. How do I filter this by a dynamic name?
{
"Attributes":
{
"Property1": {
"Data1": {
"Value": "50"
}
},
"Property2": {
"Data2": {
"Value": "50"
}
},
"Property - Dynamic content": {
"Data3": {
"Value": "50"
},
"Data4": {
"Value": "50"
}
}
}
}
For your requirement, please refer to my logic app below:
1. I initialized a variable and store the json same with yours to simulate your situation.
2. Then use "Parse JSON".
Please notice the schema of "Parse JSON" show as:
{
"properties": {
"Attributes": {
"properties": {
"Property - Dynamic content": {
"type": [
"object",
"array"
]
},
"Property1": {
"properties": {
"Data1": {
"properties": {
"Value": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"type": "object"
}
},
"type": "object"
},
"Property2": {
"properties": {
"Data2": {
"properties": {
"Value": {
"type": "string"
}
},
"type": "object"
}
},
"type": "object"
}
},
"type": "object"
}
},
"type": "object"
}
Please pay attention to the type of Property - Dynamic content in schema above. Since the content of Property - Dynamic content is either "object" or "array", so I set both "object" and "array" as the type of Property - Dynamic content.
3. Then I initialized a variable named "result" to get the value which you want.
As we use both type "object" and "array" in the schema for Property - Dynamic content, so you may not find it in the "Dynamic content" selection. You can input its value by expression as the screenshot above. The whole expression is: body('Parse_JSON')?['Attributes']?['Property - Dynamic content']
I was able to get what I need using inline code - javascript - If anyone else is looking for the same - here it is - This will give json from Property - dynamic content element.
var data = Object.keys(workflowContext.trigger.outputs.body.Attributes);
var key = data.filter(s => s.includes('Property')).toString(); // to get element - Property - dynamic content
return workflowContext.trigger.outputs.body.Attributes[key];
I'm trying to get into JSON schema definitions and wanted to find out, how to achieve a deeper object uniqueness in the schema definition. Please look at the following example definition, in this case a simple IO of a module.
{
"$schema": "http://json-schema.org/draft-06/schema#",
"type": "object",
"required": ["modulIOs"],
"properties": {
"modulIOs": {
"type": "array",
"uniqueItems": true,
"items": {
"allOf": [
{
"type": "object",
"required": ["ioPosition","ioType","ioFunction"],
"additionalProperties": false,
"properties": {
"ioPosition": {
"type": "integer"
},
"ioType": {
"type":"string",
"enum": ["in","out"]
},
"ioFunction": {
"type":"string"
}
}
}
]
}
}
}
}
When I validate the following with i.E. draft-06 I get a positive validation.
{"modulIOs":
[
{
"ioPosition":1,
"ioType":"in",
"ioFunction":"240 V AC in"
},
{
"ioPosition":1,
"ioType":"in",
"ioFunction":"24 V DC in"
}
]
}
I'm aware that the validation is successfull because the validator does what he's intended to - it checks the structure of a JSON-object, but is there a possibility to validate object value data in deeper objects or do i need to perform the check elsewhere?
This is not currently possible with JSON Schema (at draft-7).
There is an issue raised on the official spec repo github for this: https://github.com/json-schema-org/json-schema-spec/issues/538
If you (or anyone reading this) really wants this, please thumbsup the first issue comment.
It's currently unlikely to make it into the next draft, and even if it did, time to impleemntations picking it up may be slow.
You'll need to do this validation after your JSON Schema validation process.
You can validate data value of your object fields by using JSON schema validation.
For example, if you need to check if ioPosition is between 0 and 100 you can use:
"ioPosition": {
"type": "integer",
"minimum": 0,
"maximum": 100
}
If you need to validate ioFunction field you can use regualr expression such as:
"ioFunction": {
"type": "string",
"pattern": "^[0-9]+ V [A,D]C"
}
Take a look at json-schema-validation.
I'm writing a simple JSON schema and using minItems to validate the number of items in a given array. My schema is as follows:
{
"title": "My Schema",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"root": {
"type": "array",
"properties": {
"id": {
"type": "string"
},
"myarray": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"type": "string"
},
"minItems": 4,
"uniqueItems": true
},
"boolean": {
"type": "boolean"
}
},
"required": ["id","myarray","boolean"]
}
},
"required": [
"root"
],
"additionalProperties": false
}
Now I would expect the following JSON to fail validation given the element myarray has nothing in it. But when using this online validator, it passes. Have I done something wrong or is the schema validator I'm using faulty?
{
"root":[
{
"id":"1234567890",
"myarray":[],
"boolean":true
}
]
}
I am not sure why or what it is called, but the correct schema definition for your requirement should be as shown further down.
From what I understand from the JSON Schema definitions, you should declare the properties of an array inside the items declaration. In your schema you where defining properties outside of the array item declaration.
In your schema you have the two different types of array declaration:
Once with just a single object (a string for the "myarray" object)
Once with a complex object (the object name "myComplexType" in the code below)
Have a look at the definitions of both, how they are structured and how they would be interpreted.
The corrected schema:
{
"title": "My Schema",
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"root": {
"type": "array",
"items": { <-- Difference here - "items" instead of "properties"
"type": "object", <-- here - define the array items as a complex object
"title": "myComplexType", <-- here - named for easier referencing
"properties": { <-- and here - now we can define the actual properties of the object
"id": {
"type": "string"
},
"myarray": {
"type": "array",
"items": {
"type": "string"
},
"minItems": 4,
"uniqueItems": true
},
"boolean": {
"type": "boolean"
}
}
},
"required": [
"id",
"myarray",
"boolean"
]
}
},
"required": [
"root"
],
"additionalProperties": false
}
Remove the comments I added with <-- when copying over to your code, added for pointing where there changes are.
As a note, I do however don't understand why the validator didn't give an error for the 'malformed' schema, but might just be that it saw the definition as you had it as additional properties, not entirely sure.
The only thing wrong with your schema is that the root property should have type object instead of array. Because the properties keyword is not defined for arrays, it is ignored. Therefore, the part of the schema you were trying to test was completely ignored even though it was correct.
Here is the relevant passage from the specification
Some validation keywords only apply to one or more primitive types. When the primitive type of the instance cannot be validated by a given keyword, validation for this keyword and instance SHOULD succeed.
http://json-schema.org/latest/json-schema-validation.html#rfc.section.4.1