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

Standardize handling of effective dates #11

Open
showerst opened this issue Jan 4, 2021 · 2 comments
Open

Standardize handling of effective dates #11

showerst opened this issue Jan 4, 2021 · 2 comments

Comments

@showerst
Copy link
Contributor

showerst commented Jan 4, 2021

Related to openstates/issues#219

I did a quick check and we're using multiple different extras keys for effective dates, and also capturing the dates but not adding them as an extra in a few states.

I propose we:

  1. Standardize on two extras, 'date_effective' and 'date_effective_str'
  2. 'date_effective' is for states where we can do a nice Y-m-d , 'date_effective_str' for MN which makes different parts of the legislation effective on different dates, so we can just dump the whole instruction string in.

I can probably knock this work out later this week, if it's the route we want to go down.

@jessemortenson - ping so you don't miss this

@jamesturk
Copy link
Member

I believe I haven't thought as much about this as either of you two, so mostly going to defer to you.

FWIW, I'm fine with standardizing the extras, I'd also be up for adding something to the core schema but maybe there's more discussion needed first.

@showerst
Copy link
Contributor Author

Closing this, as I plan to move this to an OSEP so we can handle it properly in core.

@jamesturk jamesturk transferred this issue from openstates/issues Feb 23, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants