|
|
|
<pre>
|
|
|
|
Drupal Content-Types, taxonomies, fields:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
---------------------------- Lookup Content-Types:
|
|
|
|
these could be taxonomies?
|
|
|
|
these should be external community generated ontologies?
|
|
|
|
we should at least check for differences...
|
|
|
|
country:
|
|
|
|
Fields from the data-feed: Country Name 1,2,3, ISO country code A2, A3, Group, Year (of the data/indicator value; AFAIK can be multiple)
|
|
|
|
Other Fields: lat/lng bounding rectangle
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
indicator:
|
|
|
|
Fields from the data-feed: Code, Pillar, Category, Name, Period, Source, Observations
|
|
|
|
pillars:
|
|
|
|
Fields from the data-feed: Pillar
|
|
|
|
indicator_category:
|
|
|
|
Fields from the data-feed: Category
|
|
|
|
indicator_source:
|
|
|
|
Fields from the data-feed: Source
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
---------------------------- Data Nodes:
|
|
|
|
the data feed needs normalisation. that is, each indicator value should be a separate node
|
|
|
|
the data feed has one row per country containing all the data-points in the columns
|
|
|
|
data:
|
|
|
|
Fields from the data-feed: Country, [NO: Group is duplication here], Year (Year of data point i think), Code, Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Should each indicator value be a separate node, or rather each indicator, with multiple value fields e.g. for the year? |
|
|
\ No newline at end of file |
|
|
|
[content-types] |
|
|
\ No newline at end of file |
