This proposal is part of the 2.03 upgrade process, please comment by replying below.
Standard
Activity and Organisation
**Schema Object** All occurrences of attribute @vocabulary-uri
**Type of Change** Definition
**Issue** Users need to be able to accurately interpret classifying and coding systems contained in IATI data. When publishers use their own, in-house codelists, it is important that the full content of these lists is easily accessible to users.
**Proposal** Change the definition of @vocabulary-uri
- From: “If the vocabulary is 99 or 98 (reporting organisation), the URI where this internal vocabulary is defined.”
- To: “If the vocabulary is 99 or 98 (reporting organisation), the URI where this internal vocabulary is defined. While this is an optional field it is STRONGLY RECOMMENDED that all publishers use it to ensure that the meaning of their codes are fully understood by data users.”
**Standards Day** It was also argued that user-defined codelists should be published in the same format as IATI codelist schema. In general there was agreement that this guideline should progress.
**Links** http://bit.ly/2lCMYvS
This topic has been included for consideration in the formal 2.03 proposal
There will be some consultation calls in early July for any 2.03 proposals where people would like to discuss them further - if you would like to discuss this proposal on one of the calls please ‘Like’ this IATI tech team post by end of Mon 26 June - you can do this by clicking the heart symbol to the bottom right hand side of this message.
Further details on the calls are available in the ‘How to participate’ topic.
This proposal will be discussed on a consultation call on Codelists and secondary publishers - Wednesday 5 July, 3pm (BST), 1 hour
To join this call, use this link from your computer, tablet or smartphone https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/564155565
You can also dial in using your phone
United Kingdom: +44 20 3713 5028
United States: +1 (312) 757-3129
Access Code: 564-155-565
Please 'like' this post if you plan on joining this call (click the heart symbol to the bottom right of this message)
Notes from consultation calls w/c 3rd July
The proposal was reviewed by those on the call and there was no objection from the group.
This proposal has been been included in the 2.03 upgrade. It can be viewed in the following two Discuss posts:
Final Proposal of 2.03 Content
Final Technical Proposal for the 2.03 Upgrade
Please log in or sign up to comment.