opendatamanchester / open3p Goto Github PK
View Code? Open in Web Editor NEWDiscover the Open 3P Data Standard: Revolutionise packaging data management and drive sustainable practices.
Home Page: https://standard.open3p.org/
License: Other
Discover the Open 3P Data Standard: Revolutionise packaging data management and drive sustainable practices.
Home Page: https://standard.open3p.org/
License: Other
In the fibre based composite expert review session it was mentioned that we might want to include and "Recycling Information/ Call to Action field" at the complete packaging level to inform end users of what to do with the complete packaging for recycling. Examples included:
This might need to include a geography level to show that the UK want the lid and carton together, whereas Stockholm want the lid removed.
JSON and CSV examples are written in previous version of the standard
http://standard.open3p.org/2.0/3_Data_Specification/3_3_Components/
In the material schema, should the materialWeight field be replaces with materialRatio?
JSON and CSV examples are written in previous version of the standard
http://standard.open3p.org/2.0/3_Data_Specification/3_6_Load_Catalogue/
Currently we have a "does this [[item]] have a recyclability accreditation" than a "where is this accreditation from" but it was pointed out in the plastic expert review that we should look at including the different accreditations' banding. With OPRL it's binary, where as others are Red/Amber/Green and others still are on a A-F banding.
The Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council has been brought up a couple of times in the expert review when talking about "components in contact with product".
Especially around the idea of direct and indirect contact
The 5_3_3_Complete_Packaging_Recycling_Disruptors.csv has incorrect data in it
Some comments on the excel spreadsheet:
Can you get some content for the governance page. @Julianlstar I'm happy to markdown stuff if you have the content. It doesn't have to be much at the moment we only have
Description of the governance arrangements for the standard, To be agreed.
and I know we are on from that.
(can't change these myself right now as github is partially down)
https://standard.open3p.org/1.1-alpha/6_Relationship_Lists/6_007_Component_End_of_Life_Routes/
componentDistruptors should be componentDisruptors
completePackagingDistruptors should be completePackagingDisruptors
There are times when components CANNOT be physically removed from others, and other times when they can. This should be including within the data standard
Need to add branding to the complete packaging csv. It needs to go AFTER householdWaste and BEFORE depositReturnScheme
There is no area within the standard to attach manufacturers against the various specifications. This needs to be added asap.
JSON and CSV examples are written in previous version of the standard
http://standard.open3p.org/2.0/3_Data_Specification/3_7_Load/
There are several (many?) fields where multiple values are accepted. We should be clear about how these should be recorded
Are there any examples of packaging being a liquid or a gas?
Is the nitrogen gas used to protect crisps from going stale and from breaking in transit packaging?
Is the liquid oil used to stop lithium (and other alkali metals) reacting with oxygen packaging?
Is silica gel packaging? This goes from solid to "gel" in the presence of moisture.
Does physical form matter?
Have we thought about how to ensure uniqueness of identifiers? If managed through the 'portal', then I guess that will do it, but is there an expectation that there may be other suppliers providing software that adheres to the standard, and if so - how do we ensure these things are globally unique?
https://opendatamanchester.github.io/PPP/1.1-alpha/3_Data_Specification/3_1_Base_Materials/
in the MaterialChemCID Notes
JSON and CSV examples are written in previous version of the standard
http://standard.open3p.org/2.0/3_Data_Specification/3_5_Multipack/
https://opendatamanchester.github.io/PPP/1.1-alpha/3_Data_Specification/3_1_Base_Materials/
attritubes -> attributes
contolled_lists -> controlled_lists
Can we check in on the required fields - there are a lot of them - just want to make sure they are really required, or whether we should have required, recommended and optionals.
There is a banner that states "Open 3P is a data standard for packaging. It currently covers plastic and is being extended to the whole packing industry." This needs to be removed as v2.0 is now for all packaging.
and
https://standard.open3p.org/1.1-alpha/6_Relationship_Lists/6_007_Component_End_of_Life_Routes/
4th row in the table link text says "component recycling disruptors controlled list" but should probably be "component disruptors controlled list
What about multiple colours and/or decorative colours?
@Julianlstar @northernjamie I think the data formats page needs a complete overhaul.
Originally posted by @DsposalTom in #62 (comment)
The 4th column of the 2nd row in this table: https://standard.open3p.org/1.1-alpha/6_Relationship_Lists/6_007_Component_End_of_Life_Routes/ has a typo - "What is the entended provided the certificate?" I suspect that this should be something like "what is the intended end of life route for this component?"
While looking into the standard and mapping them to a real world example we need to remap how materials and components map. The current state has it that the material schema contains the identifier of the component. This should be reversed so that the component contains a list of the various materials including to create the component. I have included the images below to what the current state is and the proposed future state.
Can we validate the 'tier' terminology with users (https://github.com/OpenDataManchester/PPP/blob/main/docs/4_Data_Specification/4_5_Multipack.md) doesn't feel right to me, but happy to be proved wrong..!
On the page below, we should remove the line "PPP has 5 main aims which will be delivered by 30th November 2022", and replace with something like "PPP's 5 main aims were to:"
JSON and CSV examples are written in previous version of the standard
http://standard.open3p.org/2.0/3_Data_Specification/3_4_Complete_Packaging/
The load catalogue and loads functionality is below the functionality of the other schemas and needs to be improved. They need constituents lists within the relationship lists area.
Should we add Open 3P branding to the mkdocs?
We need to add the licence to the home page of the standard and not only to the licence page of the github repo
In Materials data specification there is a reference to Material function controlled list but this is not in the controlled list section. Should it be Material Purpose or do we need to create a new controlled list?
Volume: cubic metre (m3)
3_4_Complete_Packaging
Introduction
Key concepts
Data flow
Data formats
Components
Complete Packaging
Load Catalogue
Load
Controlled lists – certificate source
Should the fields that we expect to be many to many, (example certificationSource - because it might be FSA AND a REACH certificate) be a plural (certificationSources) and the format a LIST?
What is the reasoning behind having 'Food', 'Medicinal', and 'NA'. Does NA mean not applicable? In which case should this not be 'Other' rather than 'NA'? Or 'none'? Or both?
https://github.com/OpenDataManchester/PPP/blob/main/docs/5_Controlled_Lists/5_3_1_Product_Type.csv
We should add componentContactWithProduct as a Boolean/bit field to Complete Packaging Constituents relationship list and remove it from the Complete Packaging schema. It add no value in the Complete Packaging schema
During the composting expert review it was noted that the Recycling Disruptor field was "recycling centric". When the intended end of life route(s) is declared then it would then just be a disruptor for that. For example - degradable/ compostable wouldn't be a disruptor if the projected end of life route was composting.
In theory this would aid in the helping of thinking about end of life of packaging.
Currently it says
The standard is open and free to use, copy and distribute. However, the standard is protected by the Apache License, Version 2.0{target=_blank} so you must use the correct attribution and licence.
Change it to say
The standard is open and free to use, copy and distribute. However, the standard is (C) Open Data Manchester CIC 2021-2023 and made available through the Apache License, Version 2.0 so you must use the correct attribution and licence.
Update Excel Workbook and .csv files
A declarative, efficient, and flexible JavaScript library for building user interfaces.
🖖 Vue.js is a progressive, incrementally-adoptable JavaScript framework for building UI on the web.
TypeScript is a superset of JavaScript that compiles to clean JavaScript output.
An Open Source Machine Learning Framework for Everyone
The Web framework for perfectionists with deadlines.
A PHP framework for web artisans
Bring data to life with SVG, Canvas and HTML. 📊📈🎉
JavaScript (JS) is a lightweight interpreted programming language with first-class functions.
Some thing interesting about web. New door for the world.
A server is a program made to process requests and deliver data to clients.
Machine learning is a way of modeling and interpreting data that allows a piece of software to respond intelligently.
Some thing interesting about visualization, use data art
Some thing interesting about game, make everyone happy.
We are working to build community through open source technology. NB: members must have two-factor auth.
Open source projects and samples from Microsoft.
Google ❤️ Open Source for everyone.
Alibaba Open Source for everyone
Data-Driven Documents codes.
China tencent open source team.