RDF mappings for the different value types (and property data types) is currently located in two big classes, SimpleValueRdfBuilder and ComplexValueRdfBuilder. They should be split up by data type, to improve maintainability and testability. This would also make it more streight forward to add mappings for new data types.
Description
Description
Details
Details
| Subject | Repo | Branch | Lines /- | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Split SimpleValueRdfBuilder and ComplexValueRdfBuilder | mediawiki/extensions/Wikibase | master | 1 K -524 |
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| · · · | ||||
| Resolved | daniel | T112083 [Task] Allow RDF bindings for different data types to be registered dynamically. | ||
| Resolved | daniel | T118500 [Task] Split RDF mapping code into separate classes per type | ||
| · · · |
Event Timeline
Comment Actions
Change 252026 had a related patch set uploaded (by Daniel Kinzler):
[WIP] Split SimpleValueRdfBuilder and ComplexValueRdfBuilder
Comment Actions
@Tobi_WMDE_SW I split this out of the original patch for T112083. It's unclear to me whether we want to commit to this in the current sprint. I'm confident that I can get the code finished on monday, but we'll not get this through review before the sprint ends. So, what do you recommend? Commit to this and keep working on it Kanban-style, or push it into the next sprint Scrum-style?
Comment Actions
Change 252026 merged by jenkins-bot:
Split SimpleValueRdfBuilder and ComplexValueRdfBuilder