Update docs to reflect that collection rel type can be for anything #1393
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Related Issue(s):
collection
as a relation type #1379Description:
We already have a collection rel type, so this PR is just a small docs tweak to reflect that collection links don't have to be only for items.
It's not required, but it would be nice to move
{get|set}_collection
toSTACObject
fromItem
:pystac/pystac/item.py
Lines 260 to 295 in 28352e7
However, as documented in #1392,
set_collection
returnsself
, which makes it a bit more awkward to return from theSTACObject
base class. My instinct is to hold off for moving{get|set}_collection
, and just create a tracking issue in the v2.0 milestone so that we can solve #1392 and the method move at the same time.PR Checklist:
pre-commit
hooks pass locallyscripts/test
){get|set}_collection
toSTACObject
: Move {set|get}_collection to STACObject #1399