Skip to content
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

Multiple recent 2.01 upgraded files are failing validation #117

Open
rorads opened this issue Oct 1, 2015 · 2 comments
Open

Multiple recent 2.01 upgraded files are failing validation #117

rorads opened this issue Oct 1, 2015 · 2 comments

Comments

@rorads
Copy link

rorads commented Oct 1, 2015

Hello Everyone,

Having just completed an audit of publishers who've recently upgraded to 2.01, and publishers that have files failing schema validation, I've noticed a correlation.

Each of the following publishers are currently failing validation on one or more of their files, and each have very recently upgraded to 2.01 via Aidstream (within the last 4 days, according to the Aidstream Twitter feed).

Please click through to the validator to see the errors.

There are others that upgraded earlier, but I'm yet to collate their data quality figures. Regardless, there was a similar increase in both 2.01 numbers and schema validation errors in the first week of the 2.01 upgrade.

The issue with almost all of these is that there is an element that is unexpected or missing, though they aren't systematic enough to be able to pin one down. Document links seem to be a fairly large proportion, but only form a slight majority.

Am I correct in thinking that Aidstream should either catch these validation errors? Do you think someone could look into this?

Many thanks, and kind regards,
Rory

@anjesh
Copy link
Contributor

anjesh commented Oct 6, 2015

The problem is for the new activities these problems shouldn't occur. These errors are from the previous IATI version data for e.g. format was not mandatory in v1.03 but is now required, so the legacy dpcument-link data (without format attribute) gets into the xml. It would definitely be good to catch them at AidStream end itself, validate it against the schema before publishing the file. Lets discuss.

@SJ-bond
Copy link

SJ-bond commented Oct 8, 2015

4 different issues found with 4 different organisations:

Emmanuel: missing category code in document-link element of Organisation data file (fixed)
Feed the Minds: AidStream had generated an empty xml file (fixed by republishing)
International Medical Corps: missing name element in Organisation data file (fixed)
Africa Educational Trust: missing dates in transactions (ticket sent to organisation)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants