custom data?

[bdarcus]

I've long thought there's a fundamental conflict between style portability (which is a non-negotiable requirement) and the freedom to use custom data.

But maybe I'm wrong, and there's some reasonable way?

Regardless, we need a mechanism to allow flexibility in the data model, whether it's through a formal extension mechanism, or a process that makes it easy to add new fields.

I will say the current code base already likely covers the latter; adding a new field would typically just be adding a value to some enum with a documentation string.

EDIT: the data model is now strongly-typed, so an invalid JSON or YAML import (e.g. with an unknown field) will panic.

OTOH, if some of the others ideas here (see #89) pan out, maybe we don't care about style portability as much?

[denismaier]

IIRC, @cormacrelf had some ideas regarding this over on discourse. Need to look it up...