-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 62
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
Undeprecate Common.SecondaryKey
#343
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
... and we may set it to experimental ...
@@ -218,15 +218,12 @@ | |||
</Term> | |||
|
|||
<Term Name="SecondaryKey" AppliesTo="EntityType" Type="Collection(Edm.PropertyPath)" Nullable="false"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One of our colleagues mentioned that it would make sense in course of this de-deprecation to call the term SecondaryKeys as it's a collection (analogous to AlternateKeys from the Core vocabulary.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, this is a single secondary key with one or more key properties - we do have lots of multi-part keys at SAP.
Multiple secondary keys are differentiated via qualifiers.
vocabularies/Common.xml
Outdated
<Annotation Term="Core.LongDescription"> | ||
<String>Multiple secondary keys are possible using different qualifiers. | ||
Unlike [`Core.AlternateKeys`](https://github.com/oasis-tcs/odata-vocabularies/blob/main/vocabularies/Org.OData.Core.V1.md#AlternateKeys), | ||
secondary keys cannot be used to address an entity in a resource path.</String> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I would phrase it a bit weaker ... in a sense that this addressing is not required (but I wouldn't mind if we go with your proposal)
@@ -218,15 +218,12 @@ | |||
</Term> | |||
|
|||
<Term Name="SecondaryKey" AppliesTo="EntityType" Type="Collection(Edm.PropertyPath)" Nullable="false"> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
No, this is a single secondary key with one or more key properties - we do have lots of multi-part keys at SAP.
Multiple secondary keys are differentiated via qualifiers.
No description provided.