Need a better term than "nested" in basic output

[handrews]

I'm trying to write a blog post using the proposed 2023 basic output format, and I find myself having to write an extra paragraph explaining and justifying the use of the property name "nested".

What's worse is that I can't find a way to write a compelling explanation that will work for all or even most readers. "Strictly typed languages are happier if this field is named the same thing" is not a compelling reason. For people without a background in strictly typed languages, it's not even a reason that makes sense.

I still object to forcing basic and hierarchical into the same structure to appease strictly typed languages, but if we must do that, then we need to pick a neutral name that is equally tolerable in both basic and hierarchical forms.

"outputUnits", "units", "output", "details", or just "data" or "info" would all be improvements.

Literally anything that does not imply hierarchy in a format that is intentionally not at all hierarchical would be better.

[gregsdennis]

I'm happy to change it to details. I'm not set on nested; I just couldn't think of something better that fits both cases. (I think it's simpler to have a single name.)

I'm not sure the strictly typed language argument apples anymore, though. The only place it's used in basic is the root node (which is needed to hold an overall valid property). Also, I already have logic to remove the location properties from the root node for basic during serialization, so changing the serialization name of the property for this case wouldn't be hard. It will just be nested or details or whatever in my model.

[handrews]

Awesome- yeah, I'm fine with the overall valid property thing and having the same structure for it at that level. It's only having the name be hierarchical-ish in basic that I found hard to explain.

[handrews]

Anyone object to details? If not we can just go ahead and make that change (and maybe update the "fixing output" blog post to keep it in sync?)

[gregsdennis]

@handrews please see ☝️

[handrews]

Thanks! While we're at it, how about calling the new "basic" "flat" instead? Then we just have two new formats that are standard ("flat" and "hierarchical") and three old ones that are deprecated ("basic", "detailed", and "verbose") and no overlap or breaking conflicts.

[handrews]

If we think "flat" is too closed to "flag" I supposed it could be "flattened". ("smooshed"? 😛 )

[gregsdennis]

How about "list"?

[handrews]

Yes, "list" works for me! I like it better than "flat".