The design doc uses "field name" and "field contents". The CLI module followed this naming convention. Some of the core modules were developed in parallel and use "field key" and "field value" respectively. So there's a disconnect there.
We should rename the FieldKey and FieldValue types (and all related local variables and other identifiers, error messages, etc) to be consistent with the design doc.
Acceptance criteria
The terms "field name" and "field contents" are used consistently across the codebase.
Clarification and motivation
The design doc uses "field name" and "field contents". The
CLImodule followed this naming convention. Some of the core modules were developed in parallel and use "field key" and "field value" respectively. So there's a disconnect there.We should rename the
FieldKeyandFieldValuetypes (and all related local variables and other identifiers, error messages, etc) to be consistent with the design doc.Acceptance criteria
The terms "field name" and "field contents" are used consistently across the codebase.