Open cpsubrian opened 7 years ago
@cpsubrian Adding versions is something we're working on. My thought is that we'd include the version stage ("Introduced in House"/"Reported in Senate"/etc) and URL. So, something like:
versions: [
{ 'version_code': '00', 'stage': 'Introduced in House', 'url': 'https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5/text/ih'},
{ 'version_code': '36', 'stage': 'Passed House Amended', 'url': 'https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/house-bill/5/text/eh'}
]
Thoughts?
@dwillis That is roughly how our govtrack wrapper currently outputs it. Ours looks like:
[
{
"type": "eh",
"text_url": "http://[our api url]/congress/114/bills/hr/hr749/text-versions/eh/document.html"
},
{
"type": "ih",
"text_url": "http://[our api url]/congress/114/bills/hr/hr749/text-versions/ih/document.html"
},
{
"type": "rfs",
"text_url": "http://[our api url]/congress/114/bills/hr/hr749/text-versions/rfs/document.html"
},
{
"type": "rh",
"text_url": "http://[our api url]/congress/114/bills/hr/hr749/text-versions/rh/document.html"
}
]
Obviously we have the raw .html
docs from the govtrack rsync, but your urls to the congress.gov versions would be acceptable.
Not that you have-to/should use them, but our type mappings are:
$versions = array(
'ash' => t('Additional Sponsors House'),
'ath' => t('Agreed to House'),
'ats' => t('Agreed to Senate'),
'cdh' => t('Committee Discharged House'),
'cds' => t('Committee Discharged Senate'),
'cph' => t('Considered and Passed House'),
'cps' => t('Considered and Passed Senate'),
'eah' => t('Engrossed Amendment House'),
'eas' => t('Engrossed Amendment Senate'),
'eh' => t('Engrossed in House'),
'ehr' => t('Engrossed in House-Reprint'),
'eh_s' => t('Engrossed in House (No.) Star Print [*]'),
'enr' => t('Enrolled Bill'),
'es' => t('Engrossed in Senate'),
'esr' => t('Engrossed in Senate-Reprint'),
'es_s' => t('Engrossed in Senate (No.) Star Print'),
'fah' => t('Failed Amendment House'),
'fps' => t('Failed Passage Senate'),
'hdh' => t('Held at Desk House'),
'hds' => t('Held at Desk Senate'),
'ih' => t('Introduced in House'),
'ihr' => t('Introduced in House-Reprint'),
'ih_s' => t('Introduced in House (No.) Star Print'),
'iph' => t('Indefinitely Postponed in House'),
'ips' => t('Indefinitely Postponed in Senate'),
'is' => t('Introduced in Senate'),
'isr' => t('Introduced in Senate-Reprint'),
'is_s' => t('Introduced in Senate (No.) Star Print'),
'lth' => t('Laid on Table in House'),
'lts' => t('Laid on Table in Senate'),
'oph' => t('Ordered to be Printed House'),
'ops' => t('Ordered to be Printed Senate'),
'pch' => t('Placed on Calendar House'),
'pcs' => t('Placed on Calendar Senate'),
'pp' => t('Public Print'),
'rah' => t('Referred w/Amendments House'),
'ras' => t('Referred w/Amendments Senate'),
'rch' => t('Reference Change House'),
'rcs' => t('Reference Change Senate'),
'rdh' => t('Received in House'),
'rds' => t('Received in Senate'),
're' => t('Reprint of an Amendment'),
'reah' => t('Re-engrossed Amendment House'),
'renr' => t('Re-enrolled'),
'res' => t('Re-engrossed Amendment Senate'),
'rfh' => t('Referred in House'),
'rfhr' => t('Referred in House-Reprint'),
'rfh_s' => t('Referred in House (No.) Star Print'),
'rfs' => t('Referred in Senate'),
'rfsr' => t('Referred in Senate-Reprint'),
'rfs_s' => t('Referred in Senate (No.) Star Print'),
'rh' => t('Reported in House'),
'rhr' => t('Reported in House-Reprint'),
'rh_s' => t('Reported in House (No.) Star Print'),
'rih' => t('Referral Instructions House'),
'ris' => t('Referral Instructions Senate'),
'rs' => t('Reported in Senate'),
'rsr' => t('Reported in Senate-Reprint'),
'rs_s' => t('Reported in Senate (No.) Star Print'),
'rth' => t('Referred to Committee House'),
'rts' => t('Referred to Committee Senate'),
'sas' => t('Additional Sponsors Senate'),
'sc' => t('Sponsor Change House'),
's_p' => t('Star (No.) Print of an Amendment'),
);
To be honest, not even sure where that came from or if we just made it up.
Hate to just 'bump' an issue, but wondering if there is a plan to add bill versions to the bill endpoints?
@cpsubrian no, I deserve the bump. had worked on this for a bit, and there was an issue I ran into regarding versions in the GPO xml. Will circle back on this next week.
Appreciate the update @dwillis 👍
@nbadag This one :smile:
Is this perhaps still on the roadmap? Was a really useful feature with Sunlight for text diffing and NLP.
@mininternet it definitely is; we're working with the GPO to get canonical data on versions.
What are the bill 'versions' supposed to represent in the data returned for a specific bill? Given the following request I see an empty array for
versions
, however if you go look at the bill on govtrack there were 4 versions of the bill: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr749/text