+1 (binding) In <8ce8b9a4-ae7a-41eb-ab6e-a5ceb2258...@app.fastmail.com> "[VOTE][Format] Opaque canonical extension type" on Wed, 24 Jul 2024 14:33:01 +0900, "David Li" <lidav...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hello, > > I'd like to propose the 'Opaque' canonical extension type. Prior discussion > can be found at [1] and the proposal and implementations for C++, Go, Java, > and Python can be found at [2]. The proposal is additionally reproduced below. > > The vote will be open for at least 72 hours. > > [ ] +1 Accept this proposal > [ ] +0 > [ ] -1 Do not accept this proposal because... > > [1]: https://lists.apache.org/thread/8d5ldl5cb7mms21rd15lhpfrv4j9no4n > [2]: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/41823 > > --- > > Opaque represents a type that an Arrow-based system received from an external > (often non-Arrow) system, but that it cannot interpret. In this case, it can > pass on Opaque to its clients to at least show that a field exists and > preserve metadata about the type from the other system. > > Extension parameters: > > * Extension name: ``arrow.opaque``. > > * The storage type of this extension is any type. If there is no underlying > data, the storage type should be Null. > > * Extension type parameters: > > * **type_name** = the name of the unknown type in the external system. > * **vendor_name** = the name of the external system. > > * Description of the serialization: > > A valid JSON object containing the parameters as fields. In the future, > additional fields may be added, but all fields current and future are never > required to interpret the array. > > Developers **should not** attempt to enable public semantic interoperability > of Opaque by canonicalizing specific values of these parameters.
