Skip to content

clarify that field names can be prefixed with properties or not #2

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom
Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Oct 12, 2022
Merged

clarify that field names can be prefixed with properties or not #2

merged 2 commits into from
Oct 12, 2022

Conversation

philvarner
Copy link
Contributor

Related Issue(s):

Proposed Changes:

  1. Clarify that implementers decide if field names need to be prefixed with properties or not

PR Checklist:

  • This PR has no breaking changes.
  • I have added my changes to the CHANGELOG or a CHANGELOG entry is not required.

@philvarner philvarner requested a review from m-mohr October 6, 2022 12:39
@m-mohr
Copy link
Contributor

m-mohr commented Oct 10, 2022

Should we say that a /queryables implementation would be helpful nevertheless? Otherwise, LGTM.

@philvarner
Copy link
Contributor Author

Should we say that a /queryables implementation would be helpful nevertheless? Otherwise, LGTM.

I was thinking we would define a /fieldable (includable? something like that) endpoint that is optional to implement, but not for rc.2. maybe for 1.1

@philvarner philvarner merged commit c9d6b27 into main Oct 12, 2022
@philvarner philvarner deleted the pv/fields-names-semantics branch October 12, 2022 00:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@m-mohr m-mohr Awaiting requested review from m-mohr

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@philvarner @m-mohr