openownership / lib-cove-bods

Check that your data complies with the Beneficial Ownership Data Standard (BODS) using our install our data review library to analyse files via your command line interface
https://datareview.openownership.org/
Other
1 stars 0 forks source link

Custom validation checks: update specification #100

Closed kd-ods closed 3 weeks ago

kd-ods commented 2 months ago

Existing custom tests (aka 'additional checks) are:

We need to set up some way of specifying (for now and into the future) which custom tests are needed for each version of the data standard. We can probably build on this sheet which was created to support the building and testing of the in-schema validation checks for 0.4.

Edit: 17-06-2024

The list above needs to be supplemented with the following, I think:

(See the errors defined at the end of this script.)

kd-ods commented 2 months ago

I've made a new BODS validation specification sheet (based on info from the old one). I'm currently working through the following.

kd-ods commented 2 months ago

If we think that the BODS validation specification sheet is going to be useful enough to warrant maintenance as development of BODS continues then, also:

kd-ods commented 1 month ago

The specification sheet is now ready to be used as a reference point for work on lib-cove-bods and maintaining checks for BODS constraints.

The errors currently coded in lib-cove-bods (as listed at the top of this thread) are all added next to one or multiple constraints in the sheet (apart from the exceptions listed below). When updating the code for these errors to handle BODS 0.4, please check the sheet for anything useful in the Notes column. There should also be a ticket per error (linked in the 'Related live ticket' column) where @kathryn-ods can share valid and invalid BODS 0.4 JSON to help with test-driven development.

These are the exceptional errors for which I can't see current constraints in BODS. This might be because they were only relevant in previous BODS versions.

These final two are useful checks, even though what a valid BODS array contains is rather underspecified atm. So they should be maintained for BODS 0.4.

kd-ods commented 1 month ago

@radix0000 , @kathryn-ods - I'm happy for this ticket to be closed, but I'll leave it to you two to do it next week when you're both underway on the work.