-
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
To be discussed: Do we need pretty name for feature group? #32
Comments
The whole "pretty" concept is not explained anywhere. |
@petrvanekrobe the meaning is the same as Short name in Fixture Type. But you are right, we should change description of pretty name xml attribute, "The pretty name of the attribute ." - explains nothing. |
As discussed before the winter break, i added human aimed label to each attribute, it is in the Attributes with extended description branch, original PR: #122 This commit: 0d2423f I did as little editorializing as possible. @moritzstaffel i think this is ready to be used in the Builder to provide a bit better label for the user. |
@petrvanekrobe I will have a look. Should I take care about getting this branch #122 into the |
I can get that in. We could also merge in the Wireshark dissector and the MVR schema, what do you think? |
I think this is a good thing! |
Isn't the Pretty Attribute used as the Display Name (The name that gets rendered in the UI) of the Attribute? |
@Verschwiegener yes, that is often the case. |
Feature Group has xml attribute "Pretty" - but pretty for feature groups is not defined in Appendix B.
We should either define pretty names for feature groups in Appendix B or remove xml attribute "Pretty".
Feature does not have xml attribute "Pretty".
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: