-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 12
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Additional Checks for IATI #834
Comments
I've asked @stevieflow for exact details |
@stevieflow are you ok if this is cmdline only at the first iteration - ie, only available to the toolkit? |
@robredpath seems fine |
I have the details for this, I'll pass them to @edugomez ASAP |
The work here is to add a separate run of bdd-tester to IATI CoVE. It only needs to give results when run via the cli. Note the main difference to other checks being that these should always report, even if no/all activities trigger the test. The tests are:
@tobybatch would probably find it useful to know the output design for these earlier rather than later, but that's an assumption. Definitely worth checking in with him. |
Presence of AGROVOC classificationsWe have some validation of the However for our AGROVOC additional check we want to test that there exists at least one tag with specifically a AGROVOC classification; ie. with I don't think we need to check the code value itself. |
Presence of geolocationsTalk to @rory09 or @stevieflow, but some useful links for that conversation are:
Are org IDs using recognised prefixes from org-id.guide?For 360Giving we already pull in the IATI OrganisationRegistrationAgency, which is the precursor to org-id.guide. So, we want something similar to this, but for org-id.guide instead. We also want to migrate 360 CoVE to org-id.guide soon. #760 |
@stevieflow @rory09, according to this proposed schema for the
Is that correct? Underlying 'at least' to make sure that is what we want. |
@edugomez thanks So, this would only make sense within the context of the toolkit work with @tobybatch , I think that's what @robredpath means via #834 (comment):
Because it's highly unlikely that a regular user of CoVE will be anywhere near the AGROVOC foo. Have I read this correctly? |
@stevieflow That is correct, the output of the
I guess that these should always report means that the result of additional checks for Open Ag will be empty (e.g. |
Rules so far for
For
For organisations
|
@tobybatch This is how the output would look like in the
|
This is now done, and deployed to http://iati.cove.opendataservices.coop/ |
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: