Create validation tool

[anselmbradford]

It would be great to be able to take a set of data, plug it into a tool, and validate it against the OpenReferral spec. Like what http://validator.w3.org/#validate_by_input does for HTML. What do you think about this @spara? This could be a hack-request for the community to build b/c it would live at a different repo no doubt.

[monfresh]

:thumbsup:

GTFS has this too: https://code.google.com/p/googletransitdatafeed/wiki/FeedValidator

[anselmbradford]

@monfresh Could this be something the students could work on?

[anselmbradford]

To Fix Begin a validation tool repository that aims to automate inputing a data structure and validating it against the specification in OpenReferral.

Steps

• [ ] Create validation tool repository.
• [ ] Link to validation tool repository in this issue and close the issue.

[migurski]

Here’s to More Ohana Repos in 2015!

[anselmbradford]

Initial repo here --> https://github.com/niveditc/open-referral-validation by @niveditc

[greggish]

I'm getting a lot of feedback from various sources who suggest that this is actually a near-term priority...

It would be great to check back in with @niveditc - was the validation tool completed last time around? What kind of labor would be involved in updating it to spec currently in development?

[niveditc]

@greggish – Yes, the validation tool was completed the last time around, and worked with the version of the spec that was up in May. I just took a look at the updated spec, and I think that adapting the tool to check it will not be too hard. Currently, the tool only checks that the individual CSV files are in the prescribed format, I see that some JSON was also added to specify the fields in each file, so that is something I would have to deal with.

I'm a bit busy for the next week and half, but can definitely work on this after that. Let me know what you think!

[greggish]

Awesome! Looks like this might be super important farther down in the October / November range, not in the short term. but it would be great to talk when you're less busy, one way or another.

[niveditc]

@greggish, @spara – I have some time in the next week to work on this. Comparing from May, I notice the addition of a datapackage.json file that stores the format, so I'm guessing that the CSV files no longer have a header (first line) with the field names. Also, I no longer see the distinction between required and optional CSV files / data fields (e.g. when I made this back in May, phone.csv was optional in the spec as were fields like legal_status in organization.csv). Am I missing something here?

[spara]

HI, I just got out of the hospital after an extended illness with H5N1 flu (bird flu). My goal is to get the spec updated and in a final form by the end of the month. Thank you for your assistance and I hope that you can work with this date.

[greggish]

@niveditc if you still have time this week, let's connect! There may be some other ways you can help us move forward while Sophia is recovering and catching up.

In any case, this is a really important piece for us and I'm glad to have your offer to help get it done :)

[niveditc]

@greggish – it would be great to connect on this :) I'm a bit freer on Friday and the weekend, and it would be great to do a phone call / video chat to discuss what needs to be done. Let's do the specifics on when to connect over email – niveditc@andrew.cmu.edu (unless GitHub has a private message feature that I'm unaware of)

Looking forward to working with you! :)

[spara]

prototype validation tool: https://github.com/niveditc/open-referral-validation

[greggish]

That validation tool was for a previous version of this spec, and will need to be rebuilt entirely, so this issue should be re-opened.

[spara]

Validation tool is outside the scope of the specification and should be addressed in the validation repo

[monfresh]

I agree with Sophia. The tool is related, but is a separate project.

[niveditc]

Opened an issue in the validation tool repo – https://github.com/niveditc/open-referral-validation/issues/2 @greggish, @spara – am I right in using v0.8 of the spec as the basis for rebuilding the tool or is there a newer stable version? I plan on beginning work on this in a couple of days.

[greggish]

Thanks for your patience, @niveditc. V1.0 is long past due but we're expecting it to be posted any moment now (and this repo incorrectly link to an out-of-date v0.8... version 0.9 is here and in the repo itself).

While we're waiting, if you have additional details about your schedule and anything else you might need to get this done -- let us know! :)