Skip to content
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

Rename get_transformation_list to list_transformations #46

Open
csadorf opened this issue Aug 25, 2022 · 4 comments
Open

Rename get_transformation_list to list_transformations #46

csadorf opened this issue Aug 25, 2022 · 4 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@csadorf
Copy link
Collaborator

csadorf commented Aug 25, 2022

I propose to rename the get_transformation_list() function to list_transformations() for conciseness:

def get_transformation_list(

@csadorf csadorf added the enhancement New feature or request label Aug 25, 2022
@pablo-de-andres
Copy link
Member

Shouldn't this better go in the standard app API, since we want to rename the capability?
Which might change because of #41, but that is the original source for the name.

I do agree, though. It is also not consistent with other like the semantic mappings:

def list_semantic_mappings(

@csadorf
Copy link
Collaborator Author

csadorf commented Aug 29, 2022

I don't agree that the function names in the SDK and the operationIDs (capabilities) must correspond one-to-one. One is a RESTful API, the other one is a Python library so we should use conventions that are applicable in the respective context.

@pablo-de-andres
Copy link
Member

I meant this because the capabilities also reflect this discrepancy. There is getTransformationList on one hand and listSemanticMappings (or listCollections, listDatasets) on the other.

@csadorf
Copy link
Collaborator Author

csadorf commented Sep 8, 2022

I meant this because the capabilities also reflect this discrepancy. There is getTransformationList on one hand and listSemanticMappings (or listCollections, listDatasets) on the other.

Ah yes, that should probably be renamed as well.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants