Hello@bibliofilo, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

Summary of Changes

This pull request adds support for image and table annotation to the DocAI Layout Parser. The changes include modifications todocumentai/snippets/handle_response_sample.py to include example code for enabling image and table annotation, updates todocumentai/snippets/handle_response_sample.py to add parameters for enabling image and table annotation, and updates todocumentai/snippets/handle_response_sample_test.py to enable image and table annotation in the test case.

Highlights

• Feature: Adds support for image annotation in DocAI Layout Parser.
• Feature: Adds support for table annotation in DocAI Layout Parser.
• Documentation: Updates documentation and code to match and support the new offering.

Changelog

• documentai/snippets/handle_response_sample.py
  • Added example code for enabling image and table annotation (lines 35-36).
  • Added parametersenable_image_annotation andenable_table_annotation to theprocess_document_layout_sample function (lines 467-468).
  • Modifiedprocess_document_layout_sample to includeenable_image_annotation andenable_table_annotation inProcessOptions (lines 476-477).
• documentai/snippets/handle_response_sample_test.py
  • Enabled image and table annotation in thetest_process_document_layout test case (lines 232-233).

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with theGemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

A parser's task, to dissect,
Layouts complex, to inspect.
Images and tables,
Now part of the fables,
Annotations, we now expect.

Code Review

The pull request introduces support for image and table annotation in DocAI Layout Parser. The changes include updating documentation and code to support this feature. Overall, the changes seem reasonable, but there are a few areas that could be improved for clarity and consistency.

Summary of Findings

• Inconsistent use of boolean values: The code uses string literals for boolean values in the comments but uses actual boolean values in the function definition. This inconsistency can be confusing.
• Missing documentation for new parameters: The new parametersenable_image_annotation andenable_table_annotation in theprocess_document_layout_sample function lack docstrings, which should be added to improve readability and maintainability.

Merge Readiness

The pull request is almost ready for merging. However, the inconsistencies in boolean value usage and the missing documentation for the new parameters should be addressed before merging. Once these issues are resolved, the code should be good to go. I am unable to directly approve the pull request, and users should have others review and approve this code before merging.