-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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.
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
[RCP-45] Legacy and Deprecated Data Elements #97
Comments
Slightly related I think, I'd be interested to know if we can specify somehow whether a field is filterable or not. |
Good question, @alifemove. We have added a field for this called SearchableYN in the new Field Resource proposal (RCP-042). See: #76 |
Bringing this from the discussion
I'm in favor of this, but I'd like to change the definition to After that the only reason to have the mentioned |
On the certification side of this, We should exclude deprecated fields from certification process for off market listings to reduce the impact of large historical datasets to future DD version migrations. All active listings should be included in certification and should not have deprecated used. This would decrease the migration impact and effort to clients and data providers by allowing legacy data to remain untouched. This keeps the timestamp updates and now the entity event resource from being flooded with updates with no new good content. |
If data elements show up in any records from a provider, they need to be
declared in metadata regardless if they're deprecated.
Deprecated only means that no new records will use those values. Not that
they aren't part of the data set.
…On Wed, Oct 23, 2024, 08:21 Geoff Rispin ***@***.***> wrote:
On the certification side of this, We should exclude deprecated fields
from certification process for off market listings to reduce the impact of
large historical datasets to future DD version migrations. All active
listings should be included in certification and should not have deprecated
used.
This would decrease the migration impact and effort to clients and data
providers by allowing legacy data to remain untouched. This keeps the
timestamp updates and now the entity event resource from being flooded with
updates with no new good content.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#97 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAECWPWRYDELWL2ZF4M7CHTZ465G5AVCNFSM6AAAAABQPCU2WOVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDIMZSGYYDENZUG4>
.
You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
Completely agree. This just about how bring explicit about deprecation means within the testing rules of certification. We have not documented how deprecation would impact certification testing in detail yet. |
Discussed in #36
Originally posted by paulhethmon August 1, 2022
Back in Confluence last month I asked:
I’m looking for a way to handle and express lookups that are no longer in use but exist in older listing data. As an example the field BusinessType might have a lookup of Video Store. 20 years ago that was important and used, today, not so much. I would like to expose the Video Store lookup in my metadata as a searchable item (albeit legacy) but I can’t allow it to be used on a new listing.
My search-fu this morning didn’t give me any leads on this, but it certainly seems like a situation many implementations would have.
Is there something in the standard I missed? Do we need to fill the gap?
Assigned To: @paulhethmon
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: