You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Taking it a step further, we could replace the lists of node and edge properties and specifying all of the properties in this same structure. It's a little repetitive, but offers the chance for an extra layer of validation if a property is set in the python code that wasn't configured in the yaml.
This hasn't been touched or considered in a year, and I'm tempted to drop it off the bottom of the ingest, but at this point maybe it would be worth considering this from a QC POV.
we could have some nice QC for node.category + node.namespace and edge.subject_namespace + edge.category + edge.object_namespace
I don't know how to prioritize this work, but I think we would benefit from being able to fix the surprises that we find.
We need to document which prefixes we expect for each entity type generated. At a minimum, this should look like
Taking it a step further, we could replace the lists of node and edge properties and specifying all of the properties in this same structure. It's a little repetitive, but offers the chance for an extra layer of validation if a property is set in the python code that wasn't configured in the yaml.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: