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

Record Category Code not constrained to defined enumeration correctly. #23

Open
epcondon opened this issue Dec 1, 2021 · 4 comments
Open
Labels
Pending INSIWG Review To be reviewed at the INSIWG

Comments

@epcondon
Copy link

epcondon commented Dec 1, 2021

The NIST Biometrics schema (biom) that the Interpol standard builds on defines a series of enumerated value for records category code in RecordCategoryCodeSimpleType (e.g 01, 02, 03) which show the intent that the elements include the leading zero. However it also defines the value as an integer rather than a string. When validating an XML transaction against the schema, it appears to allow values with out the leading zero i.e. "2" (rather than "02") as being valid. (It appears to be turning the enumerated value into an integer and the validating). This behaviour does not appear to be correct. It is suggested that this should be given an attribute of string rather than integer. A similar schema entry is FirstRecordCategoryCodeSimpleType.

@Jeremy-M-Int
Copy link
Collaborator

MRT table in German national implementation has been updated accordingly.
This is also to be applied to the INTERPOL Implementation.

@Jeremy-M-Int
Copy link
Collaborator

Jeremy-M-Int commented Dec 2, 2021

from Romas Kivaras LT to everyone: 10:04 AM
"This issue with leading zeroes is actual for binary NIST files too. NIST standard isn't clear about their usage. Traditionally leading zeroes are used in 1.3 tag, though some systems (SIS AFIS) don't allow them at all. Maybe, it would be worth to quit with leading zeroes in XML standard ?"
This idea is supported by INTERPOL staff and will be further explored.

@Jeremy-M-Int
Copy link
Collaborator

To be noted that this is inherited from the generic NIST Standard. This needs to be coordinated with NIST.

@Jeremy-M-Int Jeremy-M-Int added the Pending INSIWG Review To be reviewed at the INSIWG label May 21, 2024
@tsaracouvert
Copy link
Collaborator

More detail to be provided

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Pending INSIWG Review To be reviewed at the INSIWG
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants