search

paleobot / pbot-dev

Codebase and initial design documents for pbot client
MIT License
2 stars 2 forks source link

Implement schema forking and synonymies #55

Closed aazaff closed 2 years ago

aazaff commented 2 years ago

The concept of subschemas has been raised - i.e., subsets of larger schemas.

  1. Is this necessary?
  2. How would it be implemented?
aazaff commented 2 years ago

I also want to consider how this might be affected by our eventual support for forking a schema.

doricon commented 2 years ago

For question 1: I am not sure this is necessary - currently there is grouping info in the schemas correct? Like the vein characters form a character group within the MLA. I guess the question is whether those groupings within schemas, as currently implemented, can be called out and used without having to worry about the rest of the schema - is that what was desired?

aazaff commented 2 years ago

Yes, I think I named it subschema (which is not necessary), but what I really meant was forked schema -- which is something we've all supported in the past and is something that was part of the original spec.

aazaff commented 2 years ago

The core of this is redundant with #58 and #59