Fix validation of indicators

[fdiblen]

In #25 I added a validation workflow. Some of the existing indicator entries are not passing the validation.

FAILED tests/test_dimensions_and_indicators.py::test_indicators_validation - AssertionError: The schema validation failed for one or more files:
indicators/no_critical_vulnerability.json: Schema validation failed - Path: - Message: '@type' is a required property
indicators/no_leaked_credential.json: Schema validation failed - Path: - Message: '@type' is a required property

See the link below for the full log.
https://github.com/EVERSE-ResearchSoftware/indicators/actions/runs/14704818907/job/41262462934

[dgarijo]

You are right. They all should be type "indicator". Will create a PR for that. Thanks!

[dgarijo]

A PR is ready for your review.

[dgarijo]

@fdiblen reopening due to issues: https://github.com/EVERSE-ResearchSoftware/indicators/actions/runs/14732708751. Some thoughts:

• Created is a required field. Maybe it's too much of a requirement? We can make it optional.
• Source fails because it needs to be of type string. And we collect them as an object with a url, a name and possibly an @id. This needs to be better reflected in the schemas. I think it's nice to have source with name and id, it makes it easier to display rather than just a URL (plus if the URL fails at some point, we can get a little context). We can make it String or schema:CreativeWork. Or make it just schema:CreativeWork (but then people will always have to provide a dict). Thoughts?

[fdiblen]

I agree with making "created" optional.
For the source field, my preference would be using schema:CreativeWork. I don't think providing a dict is an issue.

see #39 for the implemented changes