Skip to content
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

Scoping request: Explore interoperability between extractives hub and RGI Source Library #193

Open
anderspeders opened this issue Sep 22, 2017 · 4 comments
Assignees

Comments

@anderspeders
Copy link

anderspeders commented Sep 22, 2017

Why

The extractives hub hosts +5,000 documents, guides and primary sources relevant to extractives.

The repository recently launched at this URL:
https://beta.extractiveshub.org/resource/list

What

In order to understand better the linkages and complementarity of the Extractives Hub and the RGI Source Library as document sources we would like to request a brief scoping of the use of metadata tags for documents in the Extractives Hub. This should include a review of the documents available here: https://beta.extractiveshub.org/resource/list

Documents appears to be grouped by:

  • Country
  • Filter by Resource Type
  • Filter by Year
  • Associated topics - eg. Environmental management
  • Author

In additions - are any metadata tags used which do not appear on the front end as searchable?

@mattfullerton
Copy link
Contributor

This sounds straightforward (and promising, that it would be a valuable addition).

cc. @deirdrelee - comments?

@anderspeders
Copy link
Author

Thanks @mattfullerton, do you have a sense of the time required for scoping. I think at this stage we would like to understand complementarity around tagging and countries covered.

@deirdrelee
Copy link
Collaborator

Looks interesting, let's discuss in today's meeting

@mattfullerton
Copy link
Contributor

I think we've clarified that the idea would be to offer up the RGI docs to the platform is possible, we're happy to do this by pushing or by offering assistance to their team for pulling as required.

I've removed the milestone pending decision on what we need to do.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants