Document the current JSON-based data model, and describe in an ADR

Now that 📌 Support complex SDC prop shapes: introduce (Storable)PropShape to compute field type storage settings Fixed is in, doing this is even more important.

And now that 📌 Create validation constraint for ComponentTreeStructure Needs work is in, I can do this with more detail, and with more confidence.

ADR draft is ready.

Docs next.

I'm assuming this data model will remain largely unchanged between today and DrupalCon Barcelona (in ~1.5 month). For Barcelona, we'll tag 0.1.0, per 🌱 Milestone 0.1.0: Experience Builder Demo Active .

Didn't push this forward today, but 📌 Create an Open API spec for the current mock HTTP responses Fixed instead. Which also is documentation-related 👍

I just added the comment above, unsure why my Gitlab profile doesn't match up with this one.

Anyhow, I read/reviewed it and I understand it clearly. A few capitalizations missing at the beginning of list items, but unsure how strict you are on that.

Related: 📌 Create an Open API spec for the current mock HTTP responses Fixed landed. That helps with understanding the big picture, but then the client-server communication part. This issue is solely concerned with server aspects.

@siramsay Thanks for the review! 😄

Redy for review!

Wim Leers → credited longwave → .

Addressed all of @longwave's feedback.

Would like to get @effulgentsia and @f.mazeikis to sign off on this too. It's the EOD for @f.mazeikis. So assigning to @effulgentsia. @effulgentsia, please assign to @f.mazeikis after you've reviewed it 😊

I think this all looks great at capturing the current state of things. There's a few unresolved threads from @longwave, but I think those are proposing changes that can be discussed/explored in separate issues and I don't think should hold up merging these docs in.

Passing the review baton to @f.mazeikis :)

@effulgentsia Thanks! :)

Created 2 follow-up issues based on @longwave's comments in https://git.drupalcode.org/project/experience_builder/-/merge_requests/1...

• 📌 `ComponentTreeStructure` date type: simplify the stored structure Active
• 📌 [PP-1] Consider not storing the ComponentTreeStructure data type as a JSON blob Active

#11: huh, I did respond to everything an hour after he posted that, but GitLab didn't show those to me! 🤪 Addressed all things I missed last night 😊👍

Off to @f.mazeikis now!

P.S.: it'd be great to get @tedbow to chime in too, but he's out the rest of the week. I think it'd be better to land this sooner rather than later. I'll be out in a few hours too. Please land this even in my absence. We'll keep evolving the docs/data-model.md doc (for example when 📌 `ComponentTreeStructure` date type: simplify the stored structure Active lands), but having this first ADR captures our intent for everyone to find in a compact representation.

Reviewed, re-read and approved. Nice amount of details in there, the Terminology section alone is worth it's weight in gold. I see @wim-leers is already responding to @longwave threads, so we just need @tedbow to have a look.

This looks good. I accepted my own suggestion in the MR

With:

• +1 from @effulgentsia in #11, whose abstract proposal was implemented over the past few months, and documented here
• +1 from @f.mazeikis in #14, who has helped achieve this implementation
• +1 from @tedbow in #16, who has helped achieve this implementation
• many questions from @longwave answered, where in private he wrote — which I won't take as agreement/+1, but "yes, this documentation has helped me make sense of why things are the way they currently are", which is the purpose of this issue

I've already opened several follow-ups based on @longwave's feedback (#3468269 + #3468272), and I'm sure that when he gets more involved over time, that he'll make implementation changes which we'll then update these docs for 😊

Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.