Skip to content

Conversation

@jbothma
Copy link
Contributor

@jbothma jbothma commented May 16, 2025

Users sometimes aren't sure which properties are actually used by the matcher. I think part of the the issue is that some features apply to all properties of a given type, while some only apply to properties with a given name. That's not clear from the description. That could be added to the description, but it might be more readable if kept as a separate field.

It could be presented like this:

image

@jbothma
Copy link
Contributor Author

jbothma commented May 16, 2025

@pudo Do we want this? Is this a sane way to go about it?

It's tempting to do this as structured data, but perhaps it's easier to see how realistic that is once we've done all the features as strings, and maybe that's over-engineering the slight over-engineering happening here already. So I'd propose a string only v1

@jbothma jbothma self-assigned this May 19, 2025
@jbothma jbothma changed the title Rough idea of feature range as function attribute Show which properties are used by each feature May 19, 2025
@jbothma jbothma changed the title Show which properties are used by each feature Document which properties are used by each feature May 19, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants