Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? # for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “#”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? # to your account

Scoping doc #43

Open
wants to merge 5 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Scoping doc #43

wants to merge 5 commits into from

Conversation

yulric
Copy link
Collaborator

@yulric yulric commented Nov 5, 2024

No description provided.

@yulric yulric requested review from DougManuel and CBjerke November 5, 2024 16:11
@DougManuel
Copy link
Contributor

Re: Import/Export
I wonder if being more opinionated about the metadata structure would orient this section, but I appreciate that this may be the next step.

  • We'll store the metadata using a "sidecar" approach with three main tables: catalog, variable, variable_details.
  • There is support for variable labels, value labels and tagged_NA and established use. i.e. haven and labelled packages. For import, much metadata for key users comes from SAS or Stata files that are imported using haven. We should allow users to import this metadata and the store it in variables and variable_details.
  • There should be future provisions to be interoperable with other common metadata formats. I've added a conceptual diagram.

recodeflow

@DougManuel
Copy link
Contributor

  1. Wide versus long may be better situated as a future feature.
  2. Do we want to include concepts such as logging and testing? Having clear expectations for the user about what will happen during transformations and the ability to debug, examine transformation effects, etc. Again, this could go in the next document.

DougManuel
DougManuel previously approved these changes Dec 17, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

@DougManuel DougManuel left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've made a few comments and suggestions.

We can close the PR whenever you want and address any outstanding issues with the specifications.

However, feel free to ask for more clarity.

@yulric
Copy link
Collaborator Author

yulric commented Jan 13, 2025

  1. Wide versus long may be better situated as a future feature.
  2. Do we want to include concepts such as logging and testing? Having clear expectations for the user about what will happen during transformations and the ability to debug, examine transformation effects, etc. Again, this could go in the next document.
  1. Agreed
  2. Makes sense for those to go into the next document since its hard to provide a high level overview of what should go into logging and testing without getting into the specifications.

# for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? # to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants