This might be a silly question, but how can I build the specification documentation? Is it part of the javadoc build?
Sorry i scanned the documentation and couldn't find anything specific. Thanks, Micah On Tue, Jun 2, 2020 at 12:04 AM Micah Kornfield <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks, I should have a PR up in the next few days for the spec. > > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 12:57 AM Ryan Skraba <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I'm certain that the Java implementation doesn't validate full names >> correctly (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AVRO-2659 has a fun >> example). This should be an easy fix, I'll give it a go. >> >> A PR to clarify the spec on this point would be welcome! >> >> On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 6:47 PM Micah Kornfield <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > >> > I'm happy to make PR clarifying this. I'm a little bit concerned that >> if >> > validation doesn't exist in Java (and maybe other languages today) if we >> > make the spec stricter it could break users. How has the community >> handled >> > issues like this in the past? >> > >> > Would someone familiar with the Java implementation be able to comment >> if >> > there is validation around this (I couldn't find it on a quick search)? >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Micah >> > >> > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 9:23 AM Doug Cutting <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > Yes, the intent was to prohibit namespaces starting with a dot. >> > > >> > > <empty> | (<name>((<dot><name>)*)) was the intended grammar. >> > > >> > > Doug >> > > >> > > On Thu, May 28, 2020 at 1:50 AM Ryan Skraba <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > >> > > > Hello! Hmmm... reading through the spec (again), there is a small >> > > > ambiguous point! Good catch! >> > > > >> > > > Specifically, it specifically says that ".a" is not a valid >> namespace >> > > > attribute: >> > > > >> > > > "A namespace is a dot-separated sequence of such [non-empty] names. >> > > > The empty string may also be used as a namespace ..." >> > > > >> > > > But it could be a valid full name: made from a valid namespace (the >> > > > empty string) and a valid name. >> > > > >> > > > I suspect that the original intention was that it should not be a >> > > > valid fullname, with the consequence that all valid fullnames are >> > > > valid Java class names. >> > > > >> > > > If it *were* a valid fullname, however, it would be useful to >> > > > distinguish between specifying the default namespace versus >> inheriting >> > > > a namespace from a parent record! As far as I can tell, this >> > > > behaviour isn't implemented anywhere or specified in the spec >> either. >> > > > >> > > > What do you think? The spec could be clarified either way. >> > > > >> > > > Ryan >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Wed, May 27, 2020 at 7:20 PM Micah Kornfield < >> [email protected]> >> > > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > Hi Avro Dev, >> > > > > I think there is a little bit of ambiguity in the requirements >> for the >> > > > > namespace component of a full name in the specification [1]. In >> > > > particular >> > > > > it isn't clear whether namespaces like: >> > > > > ".namespace" should be considered valid (i.e. a "null" namespace >> > > > followed a >> > > > > valid name). >> > > > > >> > > > > It appears the the C++ implementation does not think this is >> valid [2] >> > > > but >> > > > > I couldn't find a corresponding check in the Java code base (I'm >> still >> > > > > familiarizing myself with both). >> > > > > >> > > > > Should ".namespace" be considered valid? >> > > > > >> > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > Micah >> > > > > >> > > > > [1] https://avro.apache.org/docs/current/spec.html >> > > > > [2] >> > > > >> https://github.com/apache/avro/blob/master/lang/c%2B%2B/impl/Node.cc#L72 >> > > > >> > > >> >
