Cleanup docs #394
Cleanup docs #394
Conversation
README.md
Outdated
| # Deployment | ||
|
|
||
| The API is normally deployed via [Docker](https://docs.docker.com/get-started/). You can either build and host it yourself, or use one of the tested providers below: | ||
|
|
||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Was this intended? without this h1, Digital Ocean and Railway.app look like they belong under Tests
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nice catch, that was less noticible editing in monospace.
|
|
||
| ## Adding a new sorce | ||
| ## Adding a new source |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this typo should also be fixed in the table of contents, otherwise the link won't work.
|
|
||
| To add a new source, create new directory inside `data` and a `document.json` file that credits the source and links to the license it was published under. An example of this can be found [here](/data/a5e_srd/document.json). You can then add a json file for each category of content. See an existing source, such as the 5.1 SRD to see how these should be structured. | ||
| To add a new source, create new directory inside `data/v1` and a `Document.json` file that credits the source and links to the license it was published under. An example of this can be found [here](/data/v1/wotc-srd/Document.json). You can then add a json file for each Model Fixture of content. See an existing source, such as the 5.1 SRD to see how these should be structured. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
would be great if you could elaborate on the "pk" field in a document. what should be put there and the fact that the "document" field in other models need to point to it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I added a bit more, but I still don't have a great, clean answer for v2 for making PKs when there's conflicts.
Acolyte is a good example. There's one in wotc and one in a5e.
Prepending the publisher name is good, but in what hierarchy? Which publisher is best?
Prepending the ruleset might work, but could there be two "Obsidian Greatsword" items both in 5e?
I suppose I'd tend towards publisher if I had to choose. Maybe we could add a publisher shortname?
Any thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The convention so far is to add the document slug as a suffix for all 3rd party publishers.
Eg. obsidian-sword is the 5e srd item and obsidian-sword-a5e is the a5e version.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would also lean towards including a suffix.
As far as dupes, I think maybe we stick with the current convention (to avoid breaking links), then add the ruleset if it's different?
So if a5e publishes a version for D&D Next, then their item becomes obsidian-sword-a5e-ddnext (or whatever we decide on for that key?)
Since they're the original publisher of the "a5e" ruleset, we don't need to repeat it twice for them (same as we do with wotc-srd for the wotc-5e ruleset)
Updating some basic docs to represent the new data.
I also moved version.py out of the root, that's a bad place for it.