First of all, thanks for this package! It’s a good step towards versioning and interoperability of messages.
While this may be somewhat subjective, I find the name identifier a bit confusing. Identifier suggests a unique id for an individual message. Think of the response you get from AWS when you publish a message:
{
"MessageId": "e0733b15-fae4-596e-bf81-6c3c271aed0c"
}I think what you meant is not the identifier but the type of the message: as in a typing system, each (product) type is the combination of properties; in this case the keys in the message payload.
What about renaming identifier to type? Of course, this would be a BC break.
First of all, thanks for this package! It’s a good step towards versioning and interoperability of messages.
While this may be somewhat subjective, I find the name
identifiera bit confusing. Identifier suggests a unique id for an individual message. Think of the response you get from AWS when you publish a message:{ "MessageId": "e0733b15-fae4-596e-bf81-6c3c271aed0c" }I think what you meant is not the identifier but the type of the message: as in a typing system, each (product) type is the combination of properties; in this case the keys in the message payload.
What about renaming
identifiertotype? Of course, this would be a BC break.