search

relaton / relaton-bipm

MIT License
2 stars 0 forks source link

Implement language independent identifiers of BIPM #50

Closed ronaldtse closed 1 year ago

ronaldtse commented 1 year ago

As described in the BIPM referencing guide:

We need to implement language-independent identifiers for BIPM resources.

This supersedes the non-localized element:

  <docnumber>CIPM -- Recommendation 5 (1989)</docnumber>

@andrew2net can you please help go through the document and implement the necessary formats? Thanks!

Related to: https://github.com/metanorma/metanorma-bipm/issues/288

andrew2net commented 1 year ago

@ronaldtse we already have 3 identifiers: en, fr, and without language https://github.com/relaton/relaton-data-bipm/blob/5ef306664b14d8eb321d802ade822dab2125cdd2/data/cipm/meeting/recommendation/1989-05.yaml#L37-L50 I don't understand what else we need to implement.

andrew2net commented 1 year ago

@ronaldtse I'm trying to understand the BIPM referencing guide. From the bipm-data-outcomes we get meetings, decisions, declarations, recommendations, resolutions, actions. Meetings can have other types. As I understand we need en, fr, and language-independent IDs:

Are these examples correct?

ronaldtse commented 1 year ago

  • meeting - CIPM 111th meeting (2022), CIPM 111e réunion (2022), (I don't find language independent ID description for meetings, do you?)

  • decision - CIPM DECN 111-10 (2022, E), CIPM DECN 111-10 (2022, F), CIPM DECN 111-10 (2022)

This is correct.

  • declaration - CIPM DECL (1964, E), CIPM DECL (1964, F), CIPM DECL (1964) (can we omit resource-specific-id if we don't have it in the source?)

This is correct. Yes, if there is no resource-specific-id it means there is only 1 declaration and therefore no number is necessary.

  • recommendation - CIPM REC 1 (1963, E), CIPM REC 1 (1963, F), CIPM REC 1 (1963)

This is correct. Similar to the above, if there is no resource-specific-id it means there is only 1 so no number is necessary.

  • resolution - CIPM RES 2 (1946, E), CIPM RES 2 (1946, F), CIPM RES 2 (1946)

This is correct. Similar to the above, if there is no resource-specific-id it means there is only 1 so no number is necessary.

  • action - there are JCRB actions but I didn't find resource-type-short for this type. What should we use for this type?

We haven't defined the short format for "JCRB actions" yet. Will consult BIPM.

andrew2net commented 1 year ago

fixed in v.1.14.5