On Tue Nov 8 13:39:59 2022 +0000, Connor McAdams wrote:
This is largely a leftover from trying to re-use the `node_from_prov2` sequence. It isn't strictly necessary I guess, but it's a good way of knowing a node represents the exact provider that I expect it to, and that it's classified as the proper provider for the node before working with it. I guess we can reasonably assume it will always be that way, so we could create a new simpler sequence that excludes that for clarity.
I see. I guess it's not worth removing this if it means having to create another sequence.