Currently, there are schema files like "container-image.yaml." Once you look closely enough, you find out that this file actually describes keys for the artifact array that are specific to type: container-image. If we are going to have separate yaml schema for the various types of something, can they be named as such? For example, can we have all schema that depict a type of artifact named like "artifact.container-image.yaml" instead or something? It makes it much easier to quickly realize what you are looking at imo. This is sort of done with test-common.yaml and test-complete.yaml, as both depict things for the test array. Is product.yaml another list of keys for the artifact array, but this time type is product? This is another example of confusion (at least for me) due to how the files are named. I think renaming the files that are specific instances of some multi-use array to include said multi-use array would make things more clear