search

HumanRightsMeasurementInitiative / hrmi-dataportal

https://rightstracker.org
Other
4 stars 8 forks source link

ESR data: ensure accurate labelling for missing data #163

Open annemariebrook opened 4 years ago

annemariebrook commented 4 years ago

While reviewing the missing data text for the CPRs i spotted a new problem.

For countries for which there are missing ESR data we have a generic sentence that says (e.g for Niue): https://rightstracker-v3-1.web.app/en/country/NIU?as=hi

"For Niue no rights scores are available due to missing indicator data. Missing data tells us that Niue has not submitted some information to the relevant international databases."

For most countries this is fine, but for all of the territories in the Pacific it is not quite right as the problem is not (just) missing indicator data but also (and in most cases, more importantly), missing PPP-adjusted GDP data. Therefore, I would like to propose that for any country for which we do not have PPP-adjusted GDP data we simplify the sentence to this:

"For Niue no rights scores are available due to missing data."

This sentence would therefore apply not only to the Pacific territories, but also to some other countries (e.g. Taiwan).

@tmfrnz - can you please make this change? Thank you!

annemariebrook commented 4 years ago

@tmfrnz, i've just updated "hrmi.components.CountryNarrative.compAssessmentESR.noData": to say: "For {countryWithArticle} no rights scores are available due to missing data in the relevant international databases. ", And I've asked Sarah to update the translations of this field to match.

This means that the second sentence (i.e. "hrmi.components.CountryNarrative.compAssessmentESR.noDataMissingData" ) is now not required. Can you please change the code so that it only inserts the first sentence, and not the second one? Thank you.

tmfrnz commented 4 years ago

@annemariebrook I see this has been closed? Is this still relevant/required?

annemariebrook commented 4 years ago

@tmfrnz Oops, i must have accidentally closed this. I probably thought i was just closing the window! Yes it is still relevant. Thank you.

tmfrnz commented 4 years ago

@annemariebrook have removed that 2nd field and about to deploy to v3.1

tmfrnz commented 4 years ago

moving to 'review'

annemariebrook commented 4 years ago

Looks good to me, thank you @tmfrnz. I'm happy for us to close this issue now.