Skip to content
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

[Design] Consider removing default value for useTrainingLabels parameter #12079

Closed
annelo-msft opened this issue May 14, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #12354
Closed

[Design] Consider removing default value for useTrainingLabels parameter #12079

annelo-msft opened this issue May 14, 2020 · 2 comments · Fixed by #12354
Assignees
Labels
blocking-release Blocks release Client This issue points to a problem in the data-plane of the library. Cognitive - Form Recognizer Cognitive Services
Milestone

Comments

@annelo-msft
Copy link
Member

From arch board notes:

Could useTrainingLabels be made a required field, rather than optional with default:false?

FOLLOW-UP with service team on what is consistent with REST, expected customer behavior, etc

@annelo-msft annelo-msft added Client This issue points to a problem in the data-plane of the library. Cognitive Services FormRecognizer labels May 14, 2020
@annelo-msft annelo-msft added this to the [2020] June milestone May 14, 2020
@annelo-msft annelo-msft added the blocking-release Blocks release label May 18, 2020
@jeremymeng
Copy link
Member

Per discussion in internal Teams channel we will make useTrainingLabels parameter required for preview.3

@maririos
Copy link
Member

Thanks for the update Jeremy!

@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Mar 28, 2023
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
blocking-release Blocks release Client This issue points to a problem in the data-plane of the library. Cognitive - Form Recognizer Cognitive Services
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants