# First draft of HSDS 3.0 proposal

**URL:** <https://forum.openreferral.org/t/first-draft-of-hsds-3-0-proposal/264>\
**Category:** Technical\
**Created:** [October 18, 2022, 11:51am UTC](https://forum.openreferral.org/t/first-draft-of-hsds-3-0-proposal/264 "2022-10-18T11:51:13Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 5

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![davidraznick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/85f322/32.png) [@davidraznick](https://forum.openreferral.org/u/davidraznick)\
**Post date:** [October 25, 2022, 10:15am UTC](https://forum.openreferral.org/t/first-draft-of-hsds-3-0-proposal/264/5 "2022-10-25T10:15:37Z")

</div>

We had an HSDS workgroup call on this topic.

There seemed to be general agreement on:

- Structuring the schema development into [a folder of schemas](https://github.com/openreferral/specification/tree/3.0-dev/schema) as long at there is a way to compile the datapackage.json from them (which there is)
- We need to define APIs specification with JSON Schema and we can use these to help do that.
- Adding examples to the schema.

I think there is not complete agreement on:

**Having JSON versions of the standard that contains nested data and therefore has an opinionated way to structure HSDS i.e to agree on a primary representations**

So for this we have to assess the pros and cons of dong this.

**Pros:**

- Have an easier way to validate HSDS.
  - Means that we can have good external validation tooling that works not just for particular APIs but for standard itself.

- Have better validation rules, especially ones that span relations, so the standard could say if an “organization has at least 1 service”.
- Less proliferation of different JSON structures used, to aid interoperability.

**Cons:**

- Less flexibility for publishers to use the HSDS “data model” in any way they choose.
- Data will have to be denormalized in some way i.e taxonomy terms repeated each time. This could cause issues for consumer if a publisher uses different data each time.

The sub question, is if we _do agree_ to the above:

**What representation(s) should be standardized/mandated?**

I think it was agreed that the following should be standardized:

- Service
- Service at Location
- Organization with full service list (when there are never too many services for a particular org)

The question remains: what is acceptable for a publication to produce in order to be conformant?

This simple answer could be, any of them. However, ideally could mandate one for better interoperability. Obviously, we would also say that a datapackage would also be accepted.

---

_[View the full topic](https://forum.openreferral.org/t/first-draft-of-hsds-3-0-proposal/264)._