+1 (binding)

On Wed, Jul 24, 2024 at 2:19 PM Sutou Kouhei <k...@clear-code.com> wrote:

> +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.
>

Reply via email to