search

opencivicdata / docs.opencivicdata.org

Open Civic Data project documentation
https://open-civic-data.readthedocs.io
44 stars 33 forks source link

Create documents.rst #50

Closed fgregg closed 7 years ago

fgregg commented 9 years ago

Proposal for document class.

boblannon commented 8 years ago

want to second this, on the record. in fact, by the time it was fully whittled down, my proposed Disclosure object really started to feel more like a general document/record object. See #36

fgregg commented 8 years ago

@boblannon

Okay. took a pass in pulling out generalizable stuff from bills. I'm not sure if all the things in 'additional fields' should land in the document class or a disclosure subclass.

Also, I feel it's kind of weird for a document to have versions. it seems like those versions should be... documents. Maybe we should just have related documents?

Also, @jamesturk this work might be relevant to what you are doing with relatedbilldocument.

fgregg commented 8 years ago

Alright, I think we now have something workable for our Document needs in Chicago.

The big change I've made here is to now allow a Document to have versions instead, I think that Dcouments should be a more atomic type.

Could I get some feedback on this proposal, @boblannon @jamesturk

boblannon commented 8 years ago

:+1:

How would you link related Events? Just through related_entities?

fgregg commented 8 years ago

I haven't thought a lot about Events. What do you need to relate? What's your use case?

boblannon commented 8 years ago

an example would be a disclosure document (like a quarterly lobbying report) that discloses many events (like meetings, etc). another would be a campaign finance filling that reports many transactions. as i said, i think that related_entitiesis the right place for this

fgregg commented 8 years ago

I think related_entities would be a good place for this generally. But, Campaign Disclosures should probably be a subclass of Documents since you would want to model things like reporting period, periodicity, and the like.

boblannon commented 8 years ago

Sure, agreed

fgregg commented 8 years ago

Okay, how do I proceed? Should I get this PEP accepted before implementing the proposal or provide a reference implementation with the proposal?

jamesturk commented 8 years ago

No need to wait to get started, I think this is pretty much good to go, a few minor suggestions after a quick look:

could we change the places the descriptions of fields mention bill to say document?

s/full_text/text would match the WIP text stuff I've done in pupa On Oct 13, 2015 06:48, "Forest Gregg" notifications@github.com wrote:

Okay, how do I proceed? Should I get this PEP accepted before implementing the proposal or provide a reference implementation with the proposal?

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/opencivicdata/docs.opencivicdata.org/pull/50#issuecomment-147679721 .

jpmckinney commented 7 years ago

Is is worthwhile to review this PR?

fgregg commented 7 years ago

no.