search

ehn-dcc-development / eu-dcc-schema

Schema for the ehn DCC payload
Apache License 2.0
164 stars 59 forks source link

Improve description of "nam" field #132

Closed benlaurie closed 1 year ago

benlaurie commented 2 years ago

https://github.com/ehn-dcc-development/ehn-dcc-schema/blob/a603410d760fefc9073931c8c807759d9714c136/DCC.schema.json#L44 does not match https://github.com/ehn-dcc-development/ehn-dcc-schema/blob/release/1.3.0/DCC.Core.Types.schema.json.

dslmeinte commented 2 years ago

What's the mismatch?

dslmeinte commented 2 years ago

@benlaurie As with the other issue you raised: thanks for being so precise, and sorry about the short answer.

Taking the files from the latest release (1.3.1), then the nam property defined here is a reference to the person_name definition here. I don't understand just yet how that leads to a mismatch, but I'm happy to learn, as the devil is always in the details - certainly with interoperability.

benlaurie commented 2 years ago

Ah. I foolishly thought that the description was meaningful. Clearly person_name is not "Person name: Surname(s), forename(s) - in that order", it is structured data that does not even have to include forenames.

So instead the bug is "person_name/description is incorrect".

benlaurie commented 2 years ago

Also, if 1.3.1 is the current release, why is 1.3.0 the default?

dslmeinte commented 2 years ago

So instead the bug is "person_name/description is incorrect".

Ah, I now see your point! What would you like as a better description? (For starting an iteration.)

Also, if 1.3.1 is the current release, why is 1.3.0 the default?

1.3.1 should indeed be the default: I'll get back to you on that.

benlaurie commented 2 years ago

Well, it should probably say its a structure defining a person's name. Also, since some of the fields refer to a "standardised name" it would be helpful to know what standard that is.

dslmeinte commented 2 years ago

Well, it should probably say its a structure defining a person's name. Also, since some of the fields refer to a "standardised name" it would be helpful to know what standard that is.

Agree with both. I took the liberty of changing the issue's title, and we'll pick this up.

Xiphoseer commented 2 years ago

Well, it should probably say its a structure defining a person's name. Also, since some of the fields refer to a "standardised name" it would be helpful to know what standard that is.

According to https://ec.europa.eu/health/sites/health/files/ehealth/docs/covid-certificate_json_specification_en.pdf the standard (for nam/fnt in this case) is

Surname(s) of the holder transliterated using the same convention as the one used in the holder’s machine readable travel documents (such as the rules defined in ICAO Doc 9303 Part 3).

dslmeinte commented 2 years ago

@benlaurie @Xiphoseer @ryanbnl What do you think of the following for person_name's description?:

The person's name consisting at least of a separate standardised surname, or a standardised forename, or both - with standardisation done according to the rules defined in ICAO Doc 9303 Part 3