fix: assertion tests to use GeoJSON examples #2651
Conversation
- Replace examples with GeoJSON examples for assertions. - Update expected hash values and validation logic accordingly.
github-actions
bot
added
comp:sdk
![gemini-code-assist[bot]](https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/in/956858?s=60&v=4){kind=small}
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Summary of Changes
Hello @pflynn-virtru, I'm Gemini Code Assist1! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!
This pull request updates the assertion tests to utilize GeoJSON examples for statement values. This change involves modifying the format and schema definitions within the assertion configurations, updating the example JSON data to conform to GeoJSON specifications, and adjusting the expected hash values and validation logic in the tests to reflect these new GeoJSON structures. The primary goal is to ensure the assertion mechanism correctly handles and validates GeoJSON data.
Highlights
- Transition to GeoJSON: Replaced existing assertion examples with valid GeoJSON structures (Point, Polygon, FeatureCollection) in test cases.
- Schema and Format Updates: Modified the Statement.Format to "json" and Statement.Schema to "https://geojson.org/schema/GeoJSON.json" across relevant assertion configurations.
- Hash Value Recalculation: Updated the expected hash values in TestTDFWithAssertion and TestTDFWithAssertionJsonObject to match the new GeoJSON assertion content.
- Validation Logic Refinement: Adjusted the test assertions in TestTDFWithAssertionJsonObject to validate GeoJSON-specific properties (e.g., type, properties, geometry) instead of previous data structures.
Using Gemini Code Assist
The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.
Invoking Gemini
You can request assistance from Gemini at any point in your pull request via creating an issue comment (i.e. comment on the pull request page) using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands.
| Feature | Command | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Code Review | /gemini review |
Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state. |
| Pull Request Summary | /gemini summary |
Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state. |
| Comment | @gemini-code-assist | Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in issue comments and review comments. |
| Help | /gemini help |
Displays a list of available commands. |
Customization
To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.
Limitations & Feedback
Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.
You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.
GeoJSON takes hold,Data finds its true form now,Tests map the world's shape.
Footnotes
-
Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Code Review
This pull request updates the assertion tests to use GeoJSON examples, replacing the previous STANAG-based ones. The changes are well-executed, with corresponding updates to expected hash values and validation logic. I have one minor suggestion to improve consistency in one of the test cases.
sdk/assertion_test.go
Outdated
| "appliesToState": null, | ||
| "statement": { | ||
| "format": "json-structured", | ||
| "format": "json", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The Statement struct defines the Schema field with a validate:"required" tag, but a schema field is not provided in this statement object. For consistency with the other tests in this file that were updated to include a schema, you should consider adding one here as well. For example:
"statement": {
"format": "json",
"schema": "",
"value": "this is a value"
},If no specific schema applies to a plain string value, an empty string would likely suffice to satisfy the validator.
Benchmark results, click to expandBenchmark authorization.GetDecisions Results:
Benchmark authorization.v2.GetMultiResourceDecision Results:
Standard Benchmark Metrics Skipped or FailedBulk Benchmark Results
TDF3 Benchmark Results:
NANOTDF Benchmark Results:
|
- Adjust comments in `Statement` struct for improved documentation. - Update `Format` values to `json-structured` in tests. - Add optional handling for `Schema` field in `Statement`.
Benchmark results, click to expandBenchmark authorization.GetDecisions Results:
Benchmark authorization.v2.GetMultiResourceDecision Results:
Standard Benchmark Metrics Skipped or FailedBulk Benchmark Results
TDF3 Benchmark Results:
NANOTDF Benchmark Results:
|
Benchmark results, click to expandBenchmark authorization.GetDecisions Results:
Benchmark authorization.v2.GetMultiResourceDecision Results:
Standard Benchmark Metrics Skipped or FailedBulk Benchmark Results
TDF3 Benchmark Results:
NANOTDF Benchmark Results:
|
Proposed Changes
Checklist
Testing Instructions