-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 167
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[ENH] Add sphinx event to add capability table to estimators' docs individually #2468
Conversation
Thank you for contributing to
|
@all-contributors please add @inclinedadarsh for code |
I've put up a pull request to add @inclinedadarsh! 🎉 |
Seems like the issue was about commit from your side somehow, as merging main fixed it. One last bit that we should resolve is to have uniform format between what your script generate and the format in the files where capabilities are already listed. I think the simplest would be to remove the existing ones and only keep those generated by the script. Would that be OK for you @SebastianSchmidl ? |
Sure, the more automation the better 👍 |
This sounds good. Should I remove all the capabilities table from AD modules that were added manually @baraline ? |
Yes please :) |
Some information in the manually added AD tables is not captured via tags, e.g. * - Input data format
- univariate
* - Output data format
- anomaly scores ◀️ **not in tags**
* - Learning Type
- unsupervised ◀️ **not in tags** I think, we should move this information to the tags then. We just do not have a standard way to do this currently. I would propose the following:
E.g. for DWT-MLEAD: _tags = {
"capability:univariate": True,
"capability:multivariate": False,
"capability:missing_values": False,
"capability:unsupervised": True,
"capability:semi-supervised": False,
"capability:supervised": False,
"output_format: "anomaly scores"
} @MatthewMiddlehurst is this compatible with the original design of the tags and the other modules? |
Really like this as a start. Resolves a lot of issues that come with documenting estimator tags and a good base to build on potentially. I wanted to put together a short/medium GSoC project for documentation items like this so may include the PR as an example in our project page. @SebastianSchmidl single module and information-only tags are fine. I don't see anything wrong with the ones suggested there, other than maybe names if its AD only, |
Heyy, following this conversation, I think I should remove all the manually added tables in the AD modules, and the redesigning the api or adding more information in tags should be done in a newer issue. Please confirm @baraline @MatthewMiddlehurst if this is correct, if yes then I'll push a change removing all the manually added tags and checking if everything is building correctly. Thank you! |
Correct ✅ |
Works for me. If you remove the output format and learning type information from the documentation in the AD module and not add them to the tags, please open a new issue that this information was removed and needs to be added back somehow. Thank you! |
- add `html-page-context` callback event to add capabilities table individually to each estimators' docs
Hey @SebastianSchmidl & @MatthewMiddlehurst and everyone else, I have created a new issue to add the learning type and output format information in the AD module at #2490 Please check it out. I'll proceed to remove the capabilities table in the AD module |
Please review the PR and let me know if anymore changes are required. Also @MatthewMiddlehurst, I'd love to know how I can participate in GSoC regarding the same (#2468 (comment)). Please let me know how I can prepare better for GSoC if possible. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Very nice work 👍🏼 I checked some generated HTML-pages, and they contain the capabilities table as expected.
I just have some minor (code-style) requests.
Yes, these absolutely make the file more readable. Thank you for your suggestions, @SebastianSchmidl! Thank you! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
excellent, thank you
@all-contributors please add @inclinedadarsh for code |
@inclinedadarsh already contributed before to code |
Reference Issues/PRs
Fixes #1430
What does this implement/fix? Explain your changes.
Add
html-page-context
callback event to add capabilities table individually to each estimators' docs_add_estimator_capabilities_table
functionhtml-page-context
sphinx event callbackDoes your contribution introduce a new dependency? If yes, which one?
No, it doesn't.
PR checklist
For all contributions