-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 9
Issues: IATI/IATI-Schemas
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Author
Label
Projects
Milestones
Assignee
Sort
Issues list
Make the XML Schema or the Ruleset check for empty IATI Identifiers in activities
#500
opened Jul 24, 2024 by
simon-20
Why are some words capitalised in field documentation when IATI (maybe?) doesn't use RFC2119?
#478
opened Sep 8, 2023 by
robredpath
@iso-date attributes have no description of their own
duplicate
#456
opened May 17, 2022 by
nosvalds
Participating Org @type description incorrect
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#455
opened Oct 23, 2019 by
amy-silcock
Why aren't codelists specified as XMLSchema enumeration restrictions?
question
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#430
opened May 1, 2019 by
jpmckinney
@ref attribute descriptions to refer to incorrect Codelist [<=2.02]
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#408
opened Jan 9, 2018 by
hayfield
Documentation string for @iso-date attributes was lost from v2.01
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#331
opened Aug 8, 2017 by
dalepotter
Top-level Schema descriptions not standalone
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#328
opened May 9, 2017 by
hayfield
document-date does not explain how to handle updates
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#327
opened Feb 27, 2017 by
hayfield
@ref definitions explicitly mention that they are optional
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#326
opened Feb 27, 2017 by
hayfield
Recipient Country definition provides no more information than its name
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#325
opened Feb 27, 2017 by
hayfield
Reference to 'your' in Org Standard
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#324
opened Feb 27, 2017 by
hayfield
Various Org budget definitions contain attribute definition
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#323
opened Feb 27, 2017 by
hayfield
Incorrect references to iati-activity in Org Standard definition
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#322
opened Feb 27, 2017 by
hayfield
Inconsistent references to ISO 4217 currency codes
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#321
opened Feb 27, 2017 by
hayfield
Repayment date definitions provide no more information than their names
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#320
opened Feb 23, 2017 by
hayfield
fss An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
forecast
definition and rules confusing
standard management
#319
opened Feb 23, 2017 by
hayfield
fss An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
priority
states use to be an invalid value
standard management
#318
opened Feb 23, 2017 by
hayfield
fss
definition includes (incorrect) 'waffle words'
standard management
#317
opened Feb 23, 2017 by
hayfield
Definition of An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
comment
indicates it can be used everywhere
standard management
#316
opened Feb 23, 2017 by
hayfield
Missing full stops in element descriptions
standard management
An issue that involves changing a core part of the IATI Standard
#315
opened Feb 23, 2017 by
hayfield
indicator
uncertain of its plurality
standard management
#314
opened Feb 23, 2017 by
hayfield
Previous Next
ProTip!
Follow long discussions with comments:>50.