Adopt AEP-202: Fields #155
Conversation
|
Added a few high-level comments - will do a more thorough read of the PR once those are resolved. |
|
Added the proto file for |
|
Should we generalize this guidance to cover |
We should do that in a subsequent PR. I think they'll be a lot of conversation about that. |
| aligning implementations between each consumer and each service without any | ||
| issue is infeasiable. | ||
|
|
||
| #### Why document value normalizations? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Again, what guidance does this refer to?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The above guidance should satisfy this rationale.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Which guidance, specifically? As in, which line of the file says to document value normalization? The word "normalization" doesn't appear before line 37.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I wasn't being precise enough about that. It was implicit. I've added some information in the beginning explaining how validators are useful for field normalization and why that process occurs.
Let me know if it isn't precise enough.
Co-authored-by: Richard Frankel <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Richard Frankel <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Richard Frankel <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Richard Frankel <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Richard Frankel <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Richard Frankel <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Richard Frankel <[email protected]>
Addresses #148
This adopts AEP-202: Fields
Note: this still uses the google.api.field_info proto type.