Skip to content
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

Ingredients vs. Cakes Discussion #494

Open
jpradocueva opened this issue Jul 1, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Ingredients vs. Cakes Discussion #494

jpradocueva opened this issue Jul 1, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
discussion topic Item or question to be discussed by the community needs backlog review Items to review with members and confirm whether to close or carry forward spec process Related to how the spec is produced
Milestone

Comments

@jpradocueva
Copy link
Contributor

jpradocueva commented Jul 1, 2024

Maintainer: Chris

Description

Summary:

In essence the group discussed strategies for managing the presentation of both detailed and summary data, using the metaphor of "cake" for summary data and "ingredients" for detailed components. They reached a consensus to consistently provide both types of data and to clearly define which types are included. The goal is to simplify data usage for practitioners, allowing them to access detailed information without requiring complex calculations. An action item was assigned to categorize all data fields accordingly and to identify any inconsistencies between summary data and its components. Additionally, the group emphasized giving practitioners control over data versions and schema configurations.

Discussion: [link to content]

Concept Clarification: The "Ingredients & Cake" metaphor was explained. "Ingredients" refers to the detailed, raw data elements, while "cake" refers to the more aggregated, processed data.
Importance of Detailed Data: Some members emphasized the need for detailed data to allow users the flexibility to perform their analyses and derive insights.
Balance Between Granularity and Usability: There was a discussion on finding a balance between providing detailed data and ensuring the data is user-friendly and useful for the community.
Current Issues: The conversation touched on the current challenges with commitment utilization columns, which require clarity on whether they should be treated as detailed data (ingredients) or more processed data (cake).
Proposal for a Document: It was suggested that a document should be created to outline the current understanding and approach to handling ingredients versus cake. This document would serve as a baseline for further discussions and feedback.
Member Involvement: It was proposed that a member of the community, rather than a maintainer, should take the lead in drafting this document to encourage broader participation and ownership.

Agreements Reached:

Create a Baseline Document: A document will be created to outline the approach to handling detailed vs. aggregated data. This will serve as a starting point for further discussions.
Member Lead: A community member will take the lead in drafting this document to ensure broader engagement and ownership.

@jpradocueva jpradocueva added discussion topic Item or question to be discussed by the community P1 labels Jul 1, 2024
@jpradocueva jpradocueva added this to the v1.1 milestone Jul 1, 2024
@jpradocueva
Copy link
Contributor Author

jpradocueva commented Jul 2, 2024

@jpradocueva
Copy link
Contributor Author

  • TF-1 #494: Centralize Column Attributes: Michael will create a centralized spreadsheet to keep track of all columns and their attributes. To be added to Discussion-Docs folder

@jpradocueva
Copy link
Contributor Author

jpradocueva commented Jul 9, 2024

Action Items, TF-1 July 9 call:

Agreement, TF-1 July 16 call:

The group decided to postpone discussing this topic because it was unclear whether a single definitive rule could be applied universally across all scenarios.

@shawnalpay shawnalpay added the needs backlog review Items to review with members and confirm whether to close or carry forward label Oct 1, 2024
@jpradocueva jpradocueva removed the P1 label Oct 9, 2024
@shawnalpay shawnalpay added the spec process Related to how the spec is produced label Oct 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
discussion topic Item or question to be discussed by the community needs backlog review Items to review with members and confirm whether to close or carry forward spec process Related to how the spec is produced
Projects
Status: Parking Lot
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants