Missing auth. source?

[strogonoff]

This is a concept’s YAML obtained from the latest version. It contains no authoritative source. Apparently, there’re no auth. sources from this tool’s output, and therefore no sources on the new IEV demo site.

I’m not sure whether auth. sources are missing in IEV source data in XLSX, or they are missing after this tool’s processing.

---
termid: 351-50-29
term: holding element
ara:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: عنصر حجز
  language_code: ara
  notes: []
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  date_accepted: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  date_amended: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_event: published
deu:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: Halteglied
    gender: n
    plurality: singular
  language_code: deu
  notes: []
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  date_accepted: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  date_amended: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_event: published
eng:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: holding element
  definition: |-
    transfer element in which the output variable is held constant during the time intervals between sampling instants of the input variable

    SEE: Figure 8d).
  language_code: eng
  notes:
  - The time response of a holding element is a stepwise function.
  - This entry was numbered 351-28-40 in IEC 60050-351:2006.
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  date_accepted: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  date_amended: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_event: published
spa:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: elemento de bloqueo
    gender: m
    plurality: singular
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: bloqueador
    gender: m
    plurality: singular
  language_code: spa
  notes: []
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  classification: Preferred
  date_accepted: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  date_amended: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_event: published
fin:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: pitoelementti
  language_code: fin
  notes: []
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  review_decision_event: published
fra:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: élément de maintien
    gender: m
    plurality: singular
  definition: |-
    élément de transfert pour lequel la variable de sortie est maintenue constante pendant les intervalles de temps séparant les prises d'échantillon de la variable d'entrée

    VOIR: Figure 8d).
  language_code: fra
  notes:
  - La réponse dans le temps d’un élément de maintien est une fonction en échelons.
  - |-
    Cet article était numéroté 351-28-40 dans la CEI 60050-351:2006.

    image::/assets/images/parts/351/351-fig8.png[Figure 8 - Impulse-function sequence c) and stepwise function d); Séquence de fonctions impulsions c) et fonction en échelons d)]
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  date_accepted: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  date_amended: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_event: published
ita:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: elemento di mantenimento
  language_code: ita
  notes: []
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  date_accepted: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  date_amended: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_event: published
jpn:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: ホールド要素
  language_code: jpn
  notes: []
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  date_accepted: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  date_amended: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_event: published
kor:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: 유지 요소
  language_code: kor
  notes: []
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  review_decision_event: published
pol:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: element podtrzymujący
  language_code: pol
  notes: []
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  date_accepted: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  date_amended: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_event: published
por:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: elemento de retenção
  language_code: por
  notes: []
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  date_accepted: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  date_amended: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_event: published
zho:
  id: 351-50-29
  terms:
  - type: expression
    normative_status: preferred
    designation: 保持元件
  language_code: zho
  notes: []
  examples: []
  entry_status: valid
  date_accepted: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  date_amended: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_date: '2013-11-01T00:00:00+00:00'
  review_decision_event: published

[ronaldtse]

@strogonoff for this particular concept, the authoritative source is exactly this entry.

So we need to specify that "this concept is the authoritative source".

[strogonoff]

@strogonoff for this particular concept, the authoritative source is exactly this entry.

So we need to specify that "this concept is the authoritative source".

Presumably, every concept that’s a valid register item is already authoritative, and what we want to show is an external reference / citation used to explain why this concept exists. Is my understanding wrong?

If such citation is not applicable (fully original concept) or isn’t available due to lacking legacy data, then we currently show “unknown” authoritative source (to be renamed as “N/A”).

[ronaldtse]

Presumably, every concept that’s a valid register item is already authoritative, and what we want to show is an external reference / citation used to explain why this concept exists. Is my understanding wrong?

I think you are right -- if an item has no source, the source is not "unknown" but the item is authoritative by itself.