Belatedly, a couple of quick thoughts from me on this:
On step 2, humanitarian flag, I agree with @YohannaLoucheur that the humanitarian marker could be used as a flag to identify all projects that are related to humanitarian response, even if the projects are only partly related to humanitarian. I can also see arguments for not breaking projects into humanitarian and non-humanitarian components, as seeing the integrated nature of a combined humanitarian+development project might be useful?
On step 6, sectors -- I understand the reason for using DAC sector codes in the way suggested in the note, but maybe this makes it hard to understand the nature of a humanitarian intervention. If a project is education or health-related, you may only see something like
72050 - Relief co-ordination; protection and support services rather than any more detail than that.
Is there a better way of publishing that this is (e.g.) a "health project in a humanitarian response"? I know that you can use UN cluster codes, but there are only about ten of them and I wonder if using a parallel vocabulary then creates an unhelpful divide in the data between humanitarian and development projects.
A real world example of a project in IATI data currently:
- on EC ECHO website, where the project is identified as supporting "Nutrition, therapeutic & supp feeding"
- in EC ECHO IATI data, where the project is identified as "720" (Emergency Response)