minor fixes for integration into sigmf-python

[Teque5]

While implementing sigmf/sigmf-python#72, I found a change I needed to make in the spec that allow all tests to pass. I would have made a PR but I don't know if it serves another purpose.

All pattern regexes need these chars removed from the end \\$.

18c18
<           "pattern": "^(c|r)(f32|f64|i32|i16|u32|u16|i8|u8)(_le|_be)?",
---
>           "pattern": "^(c|r)(f32|f64|i32|i16|u32|u16|i8|u8)(_le|_be)?\\$",
39c39
<           "pattern": "^[^\\/\\\\:*?\"<>|]+(\\.[^\\/\\\\:*?\"<>|]+)*"
---
>           "pattern": "^[^\\/\\\\:*?\"<>|]+(\\.[^\\/\\\\:*?\"<>|]+)*\\$"
88c88
<           "pattern": "^[0-9a-fA-F]{128}"
---
>           "pattern": "^[0-9a-fA-F]{128}\\$"
182c182
<                 "pattern": "^([\\+-]?\\d{4}(?!\\d{2}\b))((-?)((0[1-9]|1[0-2])(\\3([12]\\d|0[1-9]|3[01]))?|W([0-4]\\d|5[0-2])(-?[1-7])?|(00[1-9]|0[1-9]\\d|[12]\\d{2}|3([0-5]\\d|6[1-6])))([T\\s]((([01]\\d|2[0-3])((:?)[0-5]\\d)?|24\\:?00)([\\.,]\\d+(?!:))?)?(\\17[0-5]\\d([\\.,]\\d+)?)?([zZ]|([\\+-])([01]\\d|2[0-3]):?([0-5]\\d)?)?)?)?",
---
>                 "pattern": "^([\\+-]?\\d{4}(?!\\d{2}\b))((-?)((0[1-9]|1[0-2])(\\3([12]\\d|0[1-9]|3[01]))?|W([0-4]\\d|5[0-2])(-?[1-7])?|(00[1-9]|0[1-9]\\d|[12]\\d{2}|3([0-5]\\d|6[1-6])))([T\\s]((([01]\\d|2[0-3])((:?)[0-5]\\d)?|24\\:?00)([\\.,]\\d+(?!:))?)?(\\17[0-5]\\d([\\.,]\\d+)?)?([zZ]|([\\+-])([01]\\d|2[0-3]):?([0-5]\\d)?)?)?)?\\$",

Other notes:

• Previously we checked core:label to have maxLength 20, but the spec says it MAY be longer, so I guess it's OK if we don't enforce.
• The names of the schemas in this repo are sigmf-schema, collection-schema, and antenna-schema. In the other repo we had schema-meta & schema-collection. Doesn't the latter make more sense and look better in a file listing?

[777arc]

I've also run into that while playing around with writing a postgres schema for SigMF that uses the same regexs. Def feel free to modify the schema and we can get a new release of it cut.

[777arc]

as far as the filing naming comment, i saw a bunch of other folks doing xyz-schema.json, there's also some xyz.schema.json but i didnt like that as much. the point is to make it clear its a json schema, not just json