While reviewing the 'Special data formats' section (1.2), I noticed the documentation relies on OOP terminology that might create friction with the underlying YAML format.
Specifically, I have the feeling that the term 'complex object' (used in 1.2.1) is misleading in a data serialization context. Furthermore, it seems that its use is inconsistent: section 1.2.1 refers to a dependency (lower case) as a "complex object", while section 1.2.3 refers to a Contact simply as an "object".
As such, I propose standardizing these terms to better reflect YAML specifications.
I will try to come up with some proposals soon via PR
While reviewing the 'Special data formats' section (1.2), I noticed the documentation relies on OOP terminology that might create friction with the underlying YAML format.
Specifically, I have the feeling that the term 'complex object' (used in 1.2.1) is misleading in a data serialization context. Furthermore, it seems that its use is inconsistent: section 1.2.1 refers to a
dependency(lower case) as a "complex object", while section 1.2.3 refers to aContactsimply as an "object".As such, I propose standardizing these terms to better reflect YAML specifications.
I will try to come up with some proposals soon via PR