As version 0.6 is in TP and with the Business Taxonomy hopefully coming in 0.7 it's hard to work out how some features we see today sit in the overall Roadmap for Atlas and how we should be interpreting their use.
Could someone explain how attributes added to tags are intended to be used and how they link in with the Business Taxonomy, please?
I'll provide a real-life example. One column in a table may be subject to many different regulations – PCI-DSS, DPA, etc. - and may be also be commercially sensitive, whilst another column in the table may be subject to just DPA (Data Protection Act). A governance administrator must therefore govern both columns from many angles. The administrator may want to have the following tag 'security' policies in Ranger:
So how should these be tagged in Atlas?
Should there be one tag called 'Security' with 3 attributes called 'PCI', 'PII' and 'Commercially Sensitive' associated with that tag?
But the issue I see with that is when you associate the attributes with the table columns. I have to supply a value to each attribute.
It would be really helpful to be able to build a list to associate with the tags/attributes… as well as being able to pre-assign cardinality to the list (i.e. mandatory select one, optional select one, select many, etc.).
So in my example, for the first column I would ideally like to be able to select under the 'security' tag 'PCI', PII' and Commercially Sensitive', and the second column I'd just select 'PII'.
It too would be nice to link the list back to the taxonomy because having free text for every tag/attribute is a recipe for disaster! Does anyone know if these requests are on the Roadmap at all?
Bizarrely, after much reading and searching I found this JIRA ticket - ATLAS-163 where it was proposed that attributes of tags would not be limited to strings, could be set to mandatory, etc. But this was subsequently removed stating "..the UI should not show the 'advanced setting' and only expose Name and Attribute... Everything in pink/red should not be an option to the user".
Does anyone privy to the Atlas Roadmap know if this sort of optionality for tagging behaviour be replaced elsewhere (may be in the business taxonomy?) because as a user I need this granularity to be able to implement governance in our environment?
After seeing this ticket I'm now even more unsure of the intended use case for tagging's 'Attribute name', as asked in my initial question!!!