Standing Technical Meetups

Technical
63

Hi all,

Sorry for the delay in getting this out.

Standing Technical Meetup (2025-03-12)

Key takeaways and actions

Validator / Tooling

  • Attention was brought to further work on Validation use cases since the last meeting
  • A use case centered around checking/ensuring vendor compliance with the standard was discussed.
  • It was suggested that the primary use case (post 3.0) is API endpoint validation rather than bulk data
  • Reasons for non-compliance and the utility of a pass/fail tool weā€™re discussed.
  • A need to identify or distinguish between types/degrees of pass/fail was identified.

Action:

  1. Is this user story clear and precise?
    a. If not, can you offer a clear, concise alternative suggestion?

  2. (Once weā€™ve landed on the story formulation ā€“ ) How important is it? Letā€™s start on a 5 point scale of ā€“
    a. Need to have this
    b. want to have this
    c. nice to have this
    d. Donā€™t care about this
    e. This should not be built under any circumstances

Proposal to add extra metadata to API feeds

  • The approach set out in the proposal is supported (with the addition of some definitions).
  • It was then agreed that thereā€™s a need to distinguish between the source of the feed (provenance) and responsibility for the data (stewardship).

Actions:

Approval and implementation process

  • No objections to the use of google forms to vote
  • No objections to ODS deciding on an approach to implementation (batching vs standalone upgrades)

Action

  • @kathrynods: Move from the ā€˜revision and consensusā€™ to ā€˜implementationā€™ phase once all votes are cast.

Handling Confidential Addresses in HSDS 3.0

  • The committee discussed various aspects of privacy/confidentially that were not included in the 3.1 proposal.
  • It was agree that due to the complexities and nuances of the subject a dedicated conversation with a broader range of stakeholders is needed to take this froward.

Action

  • @TechnicalCommittee is anyone willing to take the lead on this. (If not, GB will take this on after the federation conversation)
  • TBD (see above): Setup a separate/dedicated conversation regarding privacy

Versioning

  • Update on changes and deprecation of V2.0 documentation
  • Backwards compatibility considerations discussed but agreed not be an issue

Action:

UK Updates

  • Update on progress and testing of the UK validator, website and dashboard. Due to launch on 24th March.
  • Discussed ways to test other profiles to determine its utility beyond a UK context once live.
  • Over the next 6 months there will be work to support, maintain and iterate, align with international group and support UK engagement.

Action

  • @MikeThacker: To keep the group updated on further developments

Demo of Taxonomy/Terminology Alignment Tool

  • Mike has created a video showing how Info loom Networker relates to Open Referral and how it ā€˜Provides the basis for something which somebody might want to develop into a full-blown tool, for both maintaining local taxonomies in a local context and maybe also national taxonomies which can be used for data thatā€™s aggregated from multiple sourcesā€™
  • Unfortunately, we are not in a position to fund the development of this tool
  • GB is also connected with another similar tool Open Concept Lab

Resource Data Federation Discussion

  • We discussed how a broader discussion around federation could be structured and organized
  • This has been scheduled for Tues 3/25 at 11a Eastern

Action:

@everyone: Anyone interested in getting involved with this can reach out for an invite and/or submit questions to shape the agenda.

64

Things that have progressed since the meeting:

  • @kathrynods: Add definitions for publisher/developer in the proposal

:white_check_mark: See - Proposal for 3.2 - Extra metadata with API feeds - #7 by kathrynods

  • @kathrynods: Write a ticket for publisher metadata at a record level

:white_check_mark: See - Publisher/source metadata at a record level - #3 by kathrynods

  • @MikeThacker: To keep the group updated on further developments

:white_check_mark: - UK website upgrade

65

Hi all,

Hereā€™s the proposed agenda for the meeting on Wednesday. Feel free to suggest further items as always.

Validation

UK update

  • Relevant updates from Mike.

Confidentiality

Metadata API

  • Discuss the problem(s) we want to solve?
  • Agree next steps

How-to documentation for database deployment

  • I.e. Airtable: we have documentation now for deploying the 3.1 compatible Airtable.
    • Do we want to check this documentation to see if itā€™s worth including (or revising to include) in our docs site?
    • Do we want other how-to documentation for alternative methods of deployment (i.e. SQL dump) (as a complement to or alternative to Airtable)
    • Thread Potential for using AirTable for small API feeds

Federation discussion

LLM check-in

  • Check-in on this and discuss documentation format (Forum thread)
66

Follow-up: Standing Technical Meetup (2025-04-09)

Discussion points and actions

UK Update

  • New UK site and validator is live and supports original UK version 1 (JSON) and 3.0. * Stricter than previous so things are failing that werenā€™t before.
  • Access to beta development of the tool for testing. Skyler has an endpoint that can be used.
  • TPXimpact contract has been extended for 6 months.
  • They are hoping for closer alignment and knowledge sharing with the global community.
  • Feedback on the ā€˜crude export to spreadsheetā€™ tool is being used to revamp it and an MVP for a potential new tool is being mapped out.

Actions

Validator use cases

  • Discussed the distinction between schema and data compliance.
  • Data quality use cases raised. Determined that these have been covered within the existing use cases.

Actions

  • @mrshll (others are welcome) to meet with Greg and Sasha to input on use cases
  • @skyleryoung to input on the offline validation user stories

Confidentiality

  • Discussed specific use cases i.e. DV shelters and generalized use cases i.e. privacy and permissions
  • Considered a framing question for a dedicated session and how this related to consent and liability considerations.

Action

  • @bloom to put out a forum post with an invite to a dedicated session

Metadata API

  • Disucssed Davidā€™s work tracking extensive metadata and potential scalability and efficiency concerns.
  • Identified a need to feed this Skylerā€™s technical insights into ongoing strategic discussions about effective federation and move Katherineā€™s metadata proposal forward.
  • Feedback from David is that the current metadata table is quite robust/flexible.
  • Discussed the potential for guidelines on how to use the metadata table rather than change the specification.
  • Skyler suggested an extension for multi-tenant architecture

Action

How-to documentation for database deployment

  • Airtable documentation will not be added to the main documentation as implementation details are very specific and cannot be standardized.
  • Potential for tutorials or how-to-documentation for alternative methods (e.g., SQL dump, PHP/Python library) to help get people started. But not for providing implementation-specific details.
  • Matt shared knowledge on how other standards approach this. Generally with a strict line around reference documentation, maybe a tools library which includes publishing and development tools and then they either use their blog or website where they provide guidance on how to bootstrap a system that speaks their standard.
  • Agreed thereā€™s a demand for solutions to help small organizations that canā€™t afford large build-outs.
  • A resource information exchange layer was proposed for small organizations to trade data using plug-and-play solutions.
  • Raised that concept of a messaging platform needs further discussion.
  • Acknowledged the need for deploying modular datasets with exchange infrastructure, which is a bigger issue than just documentation.

Action:

  • @Dan-ODS Table for next meeting with a view to deciding whether we agree on any concrete actions

Rendering documentation in Markdown ā€“ for LLMs ā€“ is this useful?

  • Docs already in markdown but presented in HTML. No action required.