feat: Add protos for read-only BasicReport

[kungfucraig]

No description provided.

[wfa-reviewable]

This change is 

[SanjayVas]

Reviewed 9 of 19 files at r1, 6 of 6 files at r2, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 15 of 20 files reviewed, 9 unresolved discussions (waiting on @kungfucraig, @mariolamassaavedra, @stevenwarejones, and @tristanvuong2021)

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/basic_report.proto line 46 at r2 (raw file):

  string title = 2 [(google.api.field_behavior) = IMMUTABLE];

  // This is the resource name of a primitive Reporting Set that includes all of

nit: use code font when referencing something that is a known symbol, e.g. DataProvider. Apparently you can now also use cross-references.

See https://google.aip.dev/192#formatting and https://google.aip.dev/192#cross-references

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/reporting_impression_qualification_filter.proto line 53 at r2 (raw file):

  message CustomImpressionQualificationFilterSpec {
    // The impression filter criteria, no more than on per MediaType
    repeated ImpressionQualificationFilterSpec filter_spec = 2 [

nit

Suggestion:

1

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/basic_reports_service.proto line 40 at r2 (raw file):

  }

  // Ordered by `create_time` ascending, `name` ascending.

nit: the summary fragment still needs to describe the method

Suggestion:

// Lists `BasicReport` resources ordered by (`create_time` ascending, `name` ascending).

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_filter.proto line 43 at r2 (raw file):

        string string_value = 1 [(google.api.field_behavior) = IMMUTABLE];
        // Used when the event template field is an enum
        string enum_value = 2 [(google.api.field_behavior) = IMMUTABLE];

Assuming we want to use the number, as that's how enums are usually encoded over the wire.

Suggestion:

int32

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_filter.proto line 45 at r2 (raw file):

        string enum_value = 2 [(google.api.field_behavior) = IMMUTABLE];
        // Used when the event template field is a Boolean
        string bool_value = 3 [(google.api.field_behavior) = IMMUTABLE];

Suggestion:

bool

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_filter.proto line 54 at r2 (raw file):

    ];
  }
  // The terms that define the filter criteria.

Document that this forms a conjunction.

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_filter.proto line 57 at r2 (raw file):

  //
  // The a current limintation is that the number of terms must be
  // exactly one.

nit

Suggestion:

  // The current limitation is that the number of terms must be exactly one.

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/reporting_unit.proto line 39 at r2 (raw file):

  ];

  // Display names of the resource referenced by the Reporting Unit

Is this supposed to match up with the components field cardinality-wise? If so, maybe pull both fields into a separate message and repeat that.

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_groups_service.proto line 21 at r2 (raw file):

import "google/api/client.proto";
import "google/api/field_behavior.proto";
import "google/api/annotations.proto";

Unrelated change? Also isn't this sorting incorrectly? I assume it's supposed to be lexicographical?

[kungfucraig]

Reviewed 11 of 19 files at r1, 5 of 6 files at r2, 16 of 17 files at r3, 5 of 7 files at r4, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: 18 of 20 files reviewed, 5 unresolved discussions (waiting on @mariolamassaavedra, @SanjayVas, @stevenwarejones, and @tristanvuong2021)

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_filter.proto line 43 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, SanjayVas (Sanjay Vasandani) wrote…

Assuming we want to use the number, as that's how enums are usually encoded over the wire.

I would rather not use the number. It's harder on the client, and either way error checking has to be done server side.

I'd be up for dropping enum_value and allowing either string_value or int_value for enum types though.

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_filter.proto line 54 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, SanjayVas (Sanjay Vasandani) wrote…

Document that this forms a conjunction.

It's a disjunction, but yeah. A repeated Filter is a conjunction of disjunctive Terms.

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/reporting_unit.proto line 39 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, SanjayVas (Sanjay Vasandani) wrote…

Is this supposed to match up with the components field cardinality-wise? If so, maybe pull both fields into a separate message and repeat that.

I need to think on this for a bit. It may make sense to separate the structure used in the Spec from the one that's used by the Result.

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_groups_service.proto line 21 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, SanjayVas (Sanjay Vasandani) wrote…

Unrelated change? Also isn't this sorting incorrectly? I assume it's supposed to be lexicographical?

Yeah, somehow this snuck in.

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_filter.proto line 45 at r2 (raw file):

        string enum_value = 2 [(google.api.field_behavior) = IMMUTABLE];
        // Used when the event template field is a Boolean
        string bool_value = 3 [(google.api.field_behavior) = IMMUTABLE];

Done.

[kungfucraig]

Reviewed 1 of 7 files at r4, 1 of 2 files at r5.
Reviewable status: 18 of 20 files reviewed, 5 unresolved discussions (waiting on @mariolamassaavedra, @SanjayVas, @stevenwarejones, and @tristanvuong2021)

[stevenwarejones]

Reviewed 1 of 6 files at r2, 6 of 17 files at r3, 2 of 7 files at r4, 1 of 2 files at r5, 7 of 7 files at r6, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 9 unresolved discussions (waiting on @kungfucraig, @mariolamassaavedra, @SanjayVas, and @tristanvuong2021)

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_filter.proto line 54 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, kungfucraig (Craig Wright) wrote…

It's a disjunction, but yeah. A repeated Filter is a conjunction of disjunctive Terms.

So, the idea is to have a conjunctions of disjunctions, right?

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/page.proto line 42 at r6 (raw file):

    // Default value. Unused.
    ACCUMULATION_OPTIONS_UNSPECIFIED = 0;
    // Comulative metrics

nit: Cumulative

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/impression_qualification_filter.proto line 33 at r6 (raw file):

// one spec per MediaType. For example, an IQF to filter all measurable
// impressions for VIDEO and DISPLAY would provide one spec for
// video with viewability and compleition percent set to zero and a

nit: completion

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/impression_qualification_filter.proto line 54 at r6 (raw file):

  // Specifies the filter criteria for each MediaType.
  //
  // They may be at most one spec per MediaType.

nit: There

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/impression_qualification_filter_spec.proto line 42 at r6 (raw file):

  // The filter criteria.
  //
  // Event Tempalte fields that are used by any filter Terms must be

nit: Template.

Also, these are a conjunction? If so, can you document that.

[kungfucraig]

Reviewed 1 of 2 files at r5, 7 of 7 files at r6, 6 of 6 files at r7, 1 of 1 files at r8, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 5 unresolved discussions (waiting on @mariolamassaavedra, @SanjayVas, and @tristanvuong2021)

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/event_filter.proto line 54 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, stevenwarejones (Steven Ware Jones) wrote…

So, the idea is to have a conjunctions of disjunctions, right?

Yes. The repeated Filter is a conjunction. The repeated Term is a disjunction.

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/reporting_unit.proto line 39 at r2 (raw file):

Previously, kungfucraig (Craig Wright) wrote…

I need to think on this for a bit. It may make sense to separate the structure used in the Spec from the one that's used by the Result.

I split the Reporting Unit structure such that it is only used in the PageSpec and created a ReportingUnitSummary structure that is used for results. This should get the spec more expressive and allow us more flexibility on structuring output only fields.

[stevenwarejones]

Reviewed 5 of 6 files at r7, 1 of 1 files at r8, 1 of 1 files at r9, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 5 unresolved discussions (waiting on @mariolamassaavedra, @SanjayVas, and @tristanvuong2021)

[tristanvuong2021]

Reviewed 4 of 17 files at r3, 2 of 7 files at r4, 7 of 7 files at r6, 5 of 6 files at r7, 1 of 1 files at r8, 1 of 1 files at r9, all commit messages.
Reviewable status: all files reviewed, 7 unresolved discussions (waiting on @kungfucraig, @mariolamassaavedra, and @SanjayVas)

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/reporting_unit.proto line 1 at r9 (raw file):

// Copyright 2024 The Cross-Media Measurement Authors

2025

---

src/main/proto/wfa/measurement/reporting/v2alpha/reporting_impression_qualification_filter.proto line 1 at r9 (raw file):

// Copyright 2024 The Cross-Media Measurement Authors

2025