• odd-models-package
• odd-platform-ingestion-contract

https://github.com/opendatadiscovery/opendatadiscovery-specification/blob/main/specification/entities.yaml#L124-L146

There is redundant required property oddrn_field in DataSetFieldStat entity in specificaion. oddrn_field was moved into DataSetField.

Solution

• remove required property oddrn_field from DataSetFieldStat.

issue spotted in #60

Thanks @Chabbbbbo for noticing!

DEG properties excluding base ones:

• entities_list -- entities that DEG consists of
• union_id (name TBD) -- some sort of common id for every DEG's revision

For a big, exist system, it's difficult to use data discovery tech from database. So we want to do the same things from rpc, just like Response.Field as Table.Column. Have ODD considered this scene of data? Is there any experience?

Goal

The goal is to categorize tests into two distinct categories:

1. Assertion Tests: These are tests that run at specific points in time and primarily validate specific conditions or behaviors.
2. Anomaly Detection Tests: These tests are designed to identify anomalies or deviations in data, and their outcomes are influenced by the temporal aspects and lifetime of the data.

Decisions

1. Due to property type already used to specify expectation type by name, decided to introduce new property category.

Option 1: Categorizing Anomaly Detection Subtypes

In this option, we establish and classify common subtypes for anomaly detection.

Pros:

• Simplifies the process of grouping tests by their subtypes because all possible values are predefined.

Cons:

• Requires specification changes to incorporate new subtypes, which may involve additional administrative effort.

Specification:

...
DataQualityTestExpectationCategory:
    type: string
    enum:
      - ASSERTION
      - VOLUME_ANOMALY
      - FRESHNESS_ANOMALY
      - COLUMN_VALUES_ANOMALY
      - SCHEMA_CHANGE

DataQualityTestExpectation:
    type: object
    properties:
      type:
        type: string
        example: "expect_table_row_count_to_be_between"
      category:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/DataQualityTestExpectationCategory'
    additionalProperties:
      type: string
...

Code Example:

test_anomaly=DataQualityTestExpectation(
	type="volume_anomalies",
	category=DataQualityTestExpectationCategory.VOLUME_ANOMALY
)

test_assertion=DataQualityTestExpectation(
	type="expect_table_row_count_to_be_between",
	category=DataQualityTestExpectationCategory.ASSERTION
)

Option 2. Simplifying the Categorization

In this approach, we define only the main categories, and the specific type of a test, whether it's an ASSERTION or an ANOMALY_DETECTION, is determined by the DataQualityTestExpectation.type property.

Pros:

• Offers flexibility as any value can be assigned to the DataQualityTestExpectation.type property, allowing for custom categorization.
• Streamlines the process and avoids the need to create new subtypes for anomaly detection.

Cons:

• May make it challenging to group anomaly tests by their subtypes since the categorization is solely dependent on the DataQualityTestExpectation.type property.

Specification:

...
DataQualityTestExpectationCategory:
      type: string
      enum:
        - ASSERTION
        - ANOMALY_DETECTION
DataQualityTestExpectation:
    type: object
    properties:
      type:
        type: string
        example: "expect_table_row_count_to_be_between"
      category:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/DataQualityTestExpectationCategory'
    additionalProperties:
      type: string
...

Code Example:

test_anomaly=DataQualityTestExpectation(
	type="volume_anomalies",
	category=DataQualityTestExpectationCategory.ANOMALY_DETECTION
)

test_assertion=DataQualityTestExpectation(
	type="expect_table_row_count_to_be_between",
	category=DataQualityTestExpectationCategory.ASSERTION
)

Hi! I see Open Metadata standard already https://docs.open-metadata.org/metadata-standard/schemas/overview and Egeria Open Metadata types https://egeria-project.org/types/

How is Open Data Discovery Specification linked and compatible with them?

I can't find how business glossary or semantic data types defined in specification. Maybe just missed it or it's not defined yet?

About business glossary is a good blog post in Datahub blog https://blog.datahubproject.io/creating-a-business-glossary-and-putting-it-to-use-in-datahub-43a088323c12

About semantic types detection I wrote text https://medium.com/@ibegtin/semantic-data-types-systematic-approach-and-types-registry-a2c2a60a467b

We need to prepare spec to ingest relationship between data entities:

1. We assume that relationship could be only between 2 data entities (and self-reference included)
2. We prepare only 2 types of relationship at the moment: between relations (tables/files/view/etc.) and between graph nodes
3. We assume that there would be this list of attributes for different types:
   3.1 Between relations: 1) cardinality (One-to-Zero-One-or-More, One-to-One-or-More, One-to-Zero-or-One, One-to-Exactly-1); 2) Identifying/Non-identifying; 3) ODDRNs of data entities for beginning/end; 4) ODDRNs of data set fields for beginning/end (there could be composite foreign keys);
   3.2 Between graph nodes: 1) Relationship Types (name); 2) Direction; 3) List of Attributes (key-value); 4) ODDRNs of data entities for beginning/end;

We need to add an endpoint via which collectors will notify referencing data catalogs about issues and errors appearing within the collector