IATI Consultations Archive

Live discussions and consultations can be found at discuss.iatistandard.org.

27 Amendments to IATI Sector Codelist To Match DAC Purpose Codes

Avatar
Wendy Rogers
Follow

A recent cross-check all of the codes on the IATI Sector codelist at http://iatistandard.org/201/codelists/Sector/ and the latest version of the DAC purpose codes published at http://www.oecd.org/dac/stats/dacandcrscodelists.htm identified 27 mismatches. They are:

 

Mismatched title & descriptions: 6

Mismatched descriptions only: 10

Mismatched titles only: 1 

On DAC but not IATI codelist: 1

On IATI codelist but not on DAC list: 9

 

The codes that do no match and that will be amended can be seen here - https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1yzDF61AXG0o8lH1iTol2gab9Hx4WrHuHq1GvA97ICVQ/edit?usp=sharing

Have more questions? Submit a request

4 Comments

Date Votes
  • 0
    Avatar
    Mark Brough

    Re deleting codes that have been removed from a source code list, I would suggest moving that to the decimal upgrade process as it could have more far-reaching implications. For example, I know the IATI Dashboard used to only accept sectors that were on the sectors codelist; I think this has now changed, though I am not sure whether there could be some further implications.

     

    I know that previously Ben deliberately didn't delete codes from non-embedded codelists. Some more discussion here:

    http://discuss.iatistandard.org/t/amend-27-codes-on-iati-sector-codelist-to-match-dac-purpose-codes/322/3

  • 0
    Avatar
    Yohanna Loucheur

    We support in principle the harmonisation of the IATI list with its source (ie DAC). No objection to move it to the decimal upgrade to avoid the kind of issues flagged by Mark.

    Of course, the same cross-check on codes, titles and descriptions should be done on the French version of the codelist.

  • 0
    Avatar
    Ben Webb

    Yes, I would advise against removing codes from the IATI NonEmbedded lists, as they are valid for historical data. In the case of DAC, the codes suggested for removal are needed to describe historic data (ie. data about projects that took place in the past).

    My proposal for dealing with this problem better is at https://github.com/IATI/IATI-Codelists-NonEmbedded/pull/51 and there's some additional information at https://iati.titanpad.com/94

  • 0
    Avatar
    IATI Tech Team

    Thanks to everyone for your feedback. We've decided take the following actions in light of the above.

    1.  a. A separate consultation has been initiated for the addition of the one missing code, please see here.
         b. Correct discrepancies in titles and descriptions for codes that are in both. 
         c. Instead of fully removing the codes that no longer exist in the DAC codelist, mark them as deprecated by altering their names to begin with '_withdrawn_'. Thus old codes will not become incompatible with the standard, but there will still be an impetus for publishers to bring their data up to speed with the DAC codelist.

    2. This consultation will now be marked as planned (referring only to the addition of the missing code, and correcting description/name discrepancies), and a separate consultation in the 2.02 upgrades forum will be created for the deprecation of old codes.

Article is closed for comments.