-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2.7k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add guidance for implementing an external standard on graph #503
base: corranrogue9/externalstandards
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Adding missing newline
graph/GuidelinesGraph.md
Outdated
@@ -328,6 +329,19 @@ For a complete mapping of error codes to HTTP statuses, see | |||
|
|||
<a name="api-contract-and-non-backward-compatible-changes"></a> | |||
|
|||
## External standards | |||
|
|||
For ease of client use and interoperatibility, some APIs should implement a standard that is defined external to Microsoft Graph and OData. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
From Mike, I should be clear what APIs "conflict with odata stnadrad/graph guidelines"
graph/GuidelinesGraph.md
Outdated
Workloads must define these standards in their CSDL model if they do not conflict with the OData standard. | ||
Standards that *do* conflict with the OData standard may be defined in the CSDL in one of two ways: | ||
1. Using `Edm.Untyped` only and support for the external standard will come directly from the service implementation; OR | ||
2. Adding CSDL elements to model the external standard using `Edm.String` for `EnumType`s that conflict with the OData standard and `Edm.Untyped` wherever any other conflict with the OData standard occurs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
From Mike: The structuring of the conjunction makes this sentence seem like it's only about enums
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
The allowed values annotaiton should be used for strings
Signed-off-by: Troy Connor <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Jeffrey Richter <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Darrel <[email protected]>
…rties New default properties pattern
Co-authored-by: Garrett DeBruin <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Garrett DeBruin <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Garrett DeBruin <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Garrett DeBruin <[email protected]>
* Added LRO guidelines * Restore all prior named guidelines with some edits where needed * Address PR review feedback Co-authored-by: Mike Kistler <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Weidong Xu <[email protected]>
Clarify: cast is not required in order to see properties of derived types.
Fix grammar
Use proper noun name for graph product
Rename `bankAccountInformation` to `bankAccountDetail`
Fix grammar
Add link to nav prop article
Update to `existing core types`
Update description of core types in overview to addd "intrinsic"
Add guidance for types which should not have new structural properties
-require alias, as per [ADR-030](https://microsoft.sharepoint.com/teams/APICouncil/_layouts/OneNote.aspx?id=%2Fteams%2FAPICouncil%2FSiteAssets%2FAPI%20Council%20Notebook&wd=target%28ADRs.one%7CCC35B798-B670-4554-9FCF-1682729EFA23%2FADR-030%20Namespace%20Aliases%7C363534F8-EFBD-4201-9F11-DB02AD5B7FAA%2F%29) -support multiple levels below microsoft.graph (as per [ADR-030]) -clarify uniqueness across namespaces -clarify that any change to a custom namespace name is breaking -add alias to the examples as per above
fix namespace guidance
Co-authored-by: Dan Kershaw [MSFT] <[email protected]>
Clarify the naming of EnumTypes and give guidance for the use of flags enums and non-flags enums simultaneously
Add guidance for naming flags vs non-flags enums and cases where they should be defined side-by-side
Update Guidelines.md
Fixed wording from `modeling behavior` to `behavior modeling`
Fixed minor wording
…-rule Updated naming rule for Booleans
No description provided.