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
For google, the convention of {resource}_id is well ingrained into the sdks, and changing that expectation would be harmful for customers and the generated clients.
For overall APIs, removing the need to unnescessary inclusions of the resource singular would reduce the cost of code generated tooling.
We should look at changing the guidance in the general AIPs. @rofrankel also has a doc that suggests that we may want to re-evaluate the naming scheme on a broader level (e.g. with the convention to have name).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Afraid it's not currently public; we've talked about making our AIPs public but no solid plan yet. Some of what we've been working on will be reflected in this repo though. :)
Also, regarding the original issue: there are other places this comes up, e.g. repeated Book books in a ListBooksResponse. Could books just be something like items?
inspired by: aip-dev/google.aip.dev#1063
For google, the convention of
{resource}_id
is well ingrained into the sdks, and changing that expectation would be harmful for customers and the generated clients.For overall APIs, removing the need to unnescessary inclusions of the resource singular would reduce the cost of code generated tooling.
We should look at changing the guidance in the general AIPs. @rofrankel also has a doc that suggests that we may want to re-evaluate the naming scheme on a broader level (e.g. with the convention to have
name
).The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: