rdblue commented on code in PR #466:
URL: https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/466#discussion_r1859233788
##########
LogicalTypes.md:
##########
@@ -609,9 +609,20 @@ that is neither contained by a `LIST`- or `MAP`-annotated
group nor annotated
by `LIST` or `MAP` should be interpreted as a required list of required
elements where the element type is the type of the field.
-Implementations should use either `LIST` and `MAP` annotations _or_ unannotated
-repeated fields, but not both. When using the annotations, no unannotated
-repeated types are allowed.
+```
+// List<Integer> (non-null list, non-null elements)
+repeated int32 num;
+
+// List<Tuple<Integer, String>> (non-null list, non-null elements)
+repeated group my_list {
+ required int32 num;
+ optional binary str (STRING);
+}
+```
+
+For all fields in the schema, implementations should use either `LIST` and
Review Comment:
-0 on this change. I don't think this is more clear and I would prefer not
to have the churn.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@parquet.apache.org
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@parquet.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@parquet.apache.org
