stevieflow
commented
6 months ago @YohannaLoucheur sorry to be very late to this issue!
I just spent a while trying to find a Connect (or even Discuss) post on this, as I'm sure we all once discussed it.... alas, I couldn't find anything (doesn't mean it's not somewhere though!)
It's clear that :
- d-portal takes an opinion in terms of the status of an activity, based on the dates, regardless of the 'activity-status'
- d-portal also aims to simplify the various statuses that are possible through the IATI standard, in the headline views
- d-portal does also ensure the activity status values can be searched (via filters) and seen (on activity pages) too
As mitigation for [1] we should also accept that there is no definitive data use guidance from IATI, in terms of prescribing how to use certain fields (or how not to use them). So - using dates to determine a status isn't illegal (in terms of the standard) --> it's just not documented by the standard (as far as I know)
If we are to proceed with https://github.com/IATI/D-Portal/issues/660 then I think [1] above may continue to cause confusion.
Therefore, if d-portal could follow a logic of:
- activity-status 1 & 2= active on d-portal
- activity-status = 3, 4 & 5 = closed on d-portal
This would then directly use the single element in the standard that is dedicated to status. In addition, it could be very helpful if the IATI community were to agree on such conventions, to further support this
Of course, we may then receive counter claims that d-portal has suddenly declared lots activities as active/closed when their dates suggest otherwise!
However, we then have a more simpler data quality issue to resolve, as this will centre on the fact that the 'activity-status' is misleading
Here's an extreme example of an activity from a bilateral donor
Right now, this would be declared as closed by d-portal, which is "correct".
But, this hides the fact that the publisher hasn't kept their dates and status in synch, and is something they must, ultimately , fix
Fixing this would benefit many use cases. If d-portal can assist in this process by making this adjustment, I think that will be for the betterment of all
Thanks
Testing the D-Portal after the resolution of #401, I came across a problem with some of GAC's projects in "Completion" status. http://d-portal.org/ctrack.html?search&publisher=CA-3&status=3#view=main
We have a total of 322 projects in Completion:
I did the same exercize with Post-Completion projects and got similar results (projects missing an end date were listed as Active).
When scrolling down to look at the results, the Active Project box says there are data issues, but if the user insists by clicking on "View All", the 20 projects are displayed and that's one sees that dates are missing.
I understand that the absence of an end date is indeed a problem (that we'll fix). But how the D-Portal handles it is confusing for users.
Projects in Completion or Post-Completion stage should not be described as "Active", even if they are missing an end date. Why not put them rather in the "Other" category, with projects that are missing a start date?
There is some dissonance between labeling projects as "Ended" but labeling the end date "Date ending" in the results table, which implies that the end date is in the future. Could we not use more precise labels that align with the Standard, eg "Planned End Date" or "Actual End Date", so users will know exactly which type of date they are looking at?