January 2018 DAC codelist updates


(Andy Lulham) #1

DAC codelists were updated in January.

There’s only one significant change here (sector code 24050 added).

EDIT: Also, sector category 231 has changed name, from “Energy generation, distribution and efficiency – general” to “Energy Policy”.

See: https://github.com/IATI/IATI-Codelists-NonEmbedded/pull/249


Updating the CRS Purpose and Policy marker codelists
(Andy Lulham) #2

These (very minor) DAC codelist updates are still awaiting review.

I’m not going to send these updates anymore – I’ll leave it for IATI and DAC to sort between you.


(Andy Lulham) #3

Bumping this again, 5 months on.

Could we have an update on the status of this please, @IATI-techteam?


(Matt Geddes) #4

I had a quick look and 24050 is in use already by SDC and SIDA


(Andy Lulham) #5

Thanks, @matmaxgeds!

I’ve now rolled in June and July 2018 updates into the same pull request: https://github.com/IATI/IATI-Codelists-NonEmbedded/pull/249

This involves a few minor changes, including the addition of sector code 15190 “Facilitation of orderly, safe, regular and responsible migration and mobility” (this one is in use by the Netherlands MFA.)

To reiterate @matmaxgeds’ point: Since these codes aren’t yet on the replicated IATI codelist, d-portal doesn’t know about them. See:


(Matt Geddes) #6

Thanks @andylolz - it also looks to me like OIPA (may be wrong, not an OIPA API pro) therefore also doesn’t have it: https://www.oipa.nl/api/sectors/24050/

I think the bigger issue needs raising - there are a bunch of services built (some by IATI themselves, some by the community), which rely on something which is not being kept up to date - not good for encouraging data use. Is there not some document which defines the service standards between IATI and the community for keeping these up to date?

Sub-issue - if this isn’t fixed, and new datastore is going to be based on OIPA, then this means that these activities will disappear? If so, @siemvaessen, I think OIPA will need to stop relying on IATI for the codelists and maintain it’s own (urgh).


(Bill Anderson) #7

The DAC has put in place a new sustainable process for IATI to consume its codes. The development work required is a little more than trivial and it is in our job queue. Yes, there has been a couple of months delay on this, for which we apologise.

Once the development work is done codes will be kept up to date.


Updating the CRS Purpose and Policy marker codelists
(Andy Lulham) #8

Great to have a response here from the secretariat. Thanks, @bill_anderson.

The changes in this update were generated automatically, but from XLS instead of XML (so even less trivial!) However, I cross-checked these changes against the DAC XML, and noticed some minor discrepancies. So it’s still unclear which is the canonical source.

In any case, these changes can be reviewed independently of work on a new sustainable process.


More generally, I agree with @matmaxgeds that the non-embedded codelist management process probably needs a review, in order to better manage expectations. The current process for codelist management states:

We aim to make changes to these lists quickly to allow data users to take advantage of the changes immediately. These changes can be made outside of a formal decimal or integer upgrade process.

[…]

The IATI Technical Team hold regular team meetings once a week. All outstanding proposals will be discussed at that meeting. The IATI Technical Lead (Bill Anderson) has the ultimate responsibility for decisions taken.

^^ This sounds great, but doesn’t appear to be borne out in practice.


(Bill Anderson) #9

With the exception of the establishment of a new, official, sustainable process for updating DAC codes, please could you provide me with evidence where the process for non-embedded codelists “doesn’t appear to be borne out in practice” so that I can investigate further.

If you are unhappy with the work of the Technical Team could I ask you to raise your concerns with the TAG Chair who is your representative on such matters.


(Andy Lulham) #10

Hi @bill_anderson,

I’m glad this update is moving forward. I’ve provided Sam with a bit more detail. And I’m very pleased to hear the new sustainable process for updating replicated DAC codelists is in the job queue. As you know, I’ve been sending these updates since June 2017 so I’ll be happy for the break! If I can help with that, get in touch.

In any case – I’ll be at the TAG next week, so let’s discuss there.