Chore: Enrich Layer Metadata with references' schemas#80
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Objective
As a frontend developer, I want to access all schemas of all resources that have been used for computing the columns in the config.json.
Context
Currently in the style.json, only the schema of the resource linked to the layer is transferred.
However, when computing the columns in the config.json, we perform some joins on other tables to access complementary data. Some of this data is categorical so we want to be able to access the labels in the frontend. Therefore, we need to add the schemas of those references in the layer metadata of the style.json.
Solution
What I did was adding all resources that had a reference to the layer's resource, even if we don't really know if they have been effectively used to compute the columns.
A better way to do this might be to look at the joins performed in the final query but it seemed overcomplicated.