Wrong comment in relevance function?

[mmarseu]

When looking at the way jsonschema.exceptions.best_match works to figure out a way to better interpret jsonschema errors, I was mislead by what I believe to be a wrong comment.

jsonschema/jsonschema/exceptions.py

Lines 411 to 413 in d47db26

	return ( # prefer errors which are ...
	-len(error.path), # 'deeper' and thereby more specific
	error.path, # earlier (for sibling errors)

In line 412, you're saying errors which are deeper (i.e., longer path) are preferred but the code is actually doing the opposite. It prefers errors with shorter paths. Am I correct? This behavior would be in line with the documentation of the best_match function:

jsonschema/jsonschema/exceptions.py

Lines 438 to 440 in d47db26

	In general, errors that are higher up in the instance (i.e. for which
	`ValidationError.path` is shorter) are considered better matches,
	since they indicate "more" is wrong with the instance.

[Julian]

Yes that seems correct (i.e. the first comment seems wrong). PR welcome certainly.