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

Re-visit modeling practices #42

Open
matthew-carroll opened this issue Jan 13, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Re-visit modeling practices #42

matthew-carroll opened this issue Jan 13, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
area_infrastructure bounty_donation Non-compensated work p3 Still deciding if we want this type_refactor

Comments

@matthew-carroll
Copy link
Collaborator

This package appears to introduce artificial constructs in the RSS data structure for the purpose of grouping extensions.

For example, the RssFeed object contains a RssItunes child and a RssPodcastIndex child. These names don't exist in the spec. The properties within these objects should technically be supported directly within RssFeed (FYI: RssFeed seems to mean channel from an XML perspective).

Why was this modeling approach chosen? Why not name all classes and properties to reflect the XML names in the spec?

@matthew-carroll matthew-carroll added area_infrastructure type_refactor bounty_donation Non-compensated work p3 Still deciding if we want this labels Jan 13, 2024
@matthew-carroll
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@sudame Do you happen to know the answer to the question above in this ticket?

@sudame
Copy link
Collaborator

sudame commented Feb 5, 2024

@matthew-carroll Sorry for my late response, and I have no idea.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area_infrastructure bounty_donation Non-compensated work p3 Still deciding if we want this type_refactor
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants