fix: replace broken validate.sh by validate.js

[davidB]

Changes

• replace the validate.sh by validate.js that failed the CI on invalid json schema or conformance *.json
• fix the json of 3 jsonschema

BASH script has several issues:

1. Doesn't failed on error, because in bash variable (like exampled_failed) updated into a while loop are not updated outside the loop, because a while loop is a subprocess, you can look at https://www.baeldung.com/linux/while-loop-variable-scope so exampled_failed are not used to detect invalid conformance vs json schema
2. find: warning: you have specified the global option -maxdepth after the argument -type, but global options are not positional, i.e., -maxdepth affects tests specified before it as well as those specified after it. Please specify global options before other arguments.

Because 1. is a symptom of the limit of bash for this script, and the tools already require the javascript stack (nodejs/bun/...) I replace the validate.sh by validate.js with the fix (see CI that failed)

FIX #284

Submitter Checklist

As the author of this PR, please check off the items in this checklist:

• Has the primer doc been updated if a design decision is involved
• Have the JSON schemas been updated if the specification changed
• Has spec version and event versions been updated according to the versioning policy
• Meets the CDEvents contributor standards

[afrittoli]

Thanks @davidB - the shell script was a bit hacky so it's good to have a better implementation.

The only caveat on my side is that I don't know JS so I have a hard time reviewing this and I wouldn't be maintaining the script in future.
There is another effort ongoing to move the release scripts to Python, perhaps we could try and converge to that language instead?

I believe the reason I used the JS tool for this is that it was the best implementation I could find of a tool to validate against JSON schemas.

If @xibz is happy with JS it works for me - only as I said I will have a harder time helping on tools for this repo.

[davidB]

@afrittoli , I also comment on #276 , I'm in favor to not multiple tool "stack" (python, go, javascript) as build tool. TBH, I translated the bash script to js with AI, then I tuned, fixed & integrated it in the CI. As mentioned I selected javascript because it was already used (not python). I don't have strong preferences between the "scripting" languages (they have pros & cons), but in every case we'll need to use libraries (their std lib will not be enough) and maybe called some cli, so to setup the stack...

[afrittoli]

Thanks!
/approve