Common Operational Dataset tutorials may be found in the IM Toolbox > Tutorials > Common Operational Database tutorials section.
...
- Fully usable: The COD can be used for any purpose
- Partly usable: The COD has some problems that may limit its use
- Needs improvement: The COD is only useful for very limited purposes
Indicators Criteria are grouped. Each group has a rule for designation as 'Fully usable', 'Partly usable', or 'Needs improvement'. The evaluation of the entire administrative level is equal to the worst group evaluation.
Country statistics depend on the evaluation of the worst administrative level in the COD dataset.
Some COD-AB an COD-PS criteria are applicable to the entire COD-AB (an HDX 'datatset') or to the individual administrative layer. Evaluations for entire datasets are assigned to every component administrative layer.
COD-AB evaluation criteria
Metadata criteria group | ||||||
| Criterion | Description | Applicability | Guidance | Fully usable | Partly usable | Needs improvement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HDX upload | Is the COD-AB published on HDX? | Dataset | At least one indicator is satisfied | (not used) | No indicators are satisfied | |
| Public availability | Is the data available publicly? | Dataset | Options are 'public', 'private', or 'request data' | |||
| Dataset date | Is the date clearly indicated on HDX? | Dataset | 'Providing Metadata For Your Datasets On HDX' | |||
| Description | Is there a short but complete description of the dataset? | Dataset | ||||
| Source | Is the data source clearly indicated and defined on HDX? | Dataset | ||||
| Methodology or comments | Is any clarifying information provided? | Dataset | ||||
| COD tag | Is the dataset tagged as a 'COD' on HDX for easy discovery? | Dataset | ||||
| IMWG endorsement | Is the dataset endorsed by the IMWG? | Dataset | ||||
| License | Is the correct license specified on HDX? | Dataset | TO BE DISCUSSED WITHIN FIS | |||
| Single dataset | Are all the COD-AB files (HDX resources) grouped into one HDX dataset? | Dataset | Best Practice | |||
| Unique levels | Is there only one file (HDX resource) per file format per administrative level? | Dataset | Exceptions may be made. For instance, the Bangladesh COD-AB features layers with and without inland waters. Equivalent files should not be found elsewhere on HDX. | |||
| Gazeteer | Are the COD-AB attribute tables for all administrative levels available as an Excel file on HDX? | Dataset | CAN THIS BE REMOVED? IT IS REPEATED IN THE ATTRIBUTE SECTION. | |||
| CPG file | Is a .cpg file available for each ArcGIS shapefile? | Administrative layer | A .cpg file is an ArcGIS codepage that comes with the other files extensions and that can be used to define the code. CPG file is not mandatory but should be present when needed. | |||
| Metadata file | A metadata file (in .txt format) or gazeteer tab must be available to provide further information on data | Dataset | ||||
| Zip file naming | Is the zip naming convention followed? | Administrative layer | Zip file naming convention helps to standardize referencing of files NOTE LINK HAS NOT BEEN MIGRATED FROM TSP | |||
Shapefile nameing | Is the shapefile naming convention followed? | Administrative layer | The SHP files should follow the naming convention (standards). | |||
Attribute criteria group | ||||||
| Criterion | Description | Applicability | Guidance | Fully usable | Partly usable | Needs improvement |
| Feature count | Are there the correct number of features? | Administrative layer | Consult reliable sources, particularly COD-PS datasets | Two indicators are satisfied | (not used) | Fewer than two indicators are satisfied |
| Complete feature names | Are there any missing feature names? | Administrative layer | ||||
| Clear field names | Column names must make sense and be clear to prevent any confusion. Is there any explanation/document about standardization of items? | Administrative layer | ||||
| Latin alphabet names | Are the feature names written in the Latin alphabet? | Administrative layer | If names are written in any alphabet which is not Latin, it must be translated into English in another column. (Link to ITOS schema) | |||
| Gazetteer (tabular) file | Are the COD-AB attribute tables for all administrative levels available as an Excel file on HDX? | Administrative layer | Best Practice | |||
| Parentage | Lower levels have higher attributes included | Administrative layer | Lower levels should include higher levels to see the AB unit it falls in. Best Practice | |||
| Unique feature names | Do any features have duplicate names (within the same higher administrative levels)? | Administrative layer | Duplicates attributes check tutorial | |||
| P-code criteria group | ||||||
| Criterion | Description | Applicability | Guidance | Fully usable | Partly usable | Needs improvement |
| P-codes constructed | Do the P-codes incorporate values from higher levels? | Administrative level | Pcodes guidelines | Both criteria are satisfied | (not used) | Neither criteria is satisfied |
| Unique P-codes | Are the P-codes unique? | Administrative level | Duplicates attributes check tutorial | |||
| Parentage criteria group | ||||||
| Criterion | Description | Applicability | Guidance | Fully usable | Partly usable | Needs improvement |
| P-code parentage | Is the P-code hierarchy the same between levels? | Administrative level | Parentage check tutorial | Both criteria are satisfied | (not used) | Neither criteria is satisfied |
| Name parentage | Is the unit names hierarchy the same between levels? | Administrative level | Parentage check tutorial | |||
| Spatial criteria group | ||||||
| Criterion | Description | Applicability | Guidance | Fully suable | Party usable | Needs improvement |
| Features are polygons | Are all administrative boundaries represented as closed polygons? | Administrative level | How to convert polylines to polygons tutorial | All criteria are satisfied. | All criteria except 'Correct topology' are satisfied | Some criteria, apart from 'Correct topology' are not satisfied |
| Consistent coordinate systems | Is the coordinate system WGS1984 or at least consistent? | Dataset | ||||
| Geometric nesting | Is the geometric nesting clean? | Dataset | Nesting error tutorial | |||
| Correct topology | Are there topological gaps and overlaps? | Administrative level | Topology check tutorial | |||
| Country coverage | Are there unjustified gaps in the country coverage? | Administrative level | ||||
COD-PS evaluation criteria
Metadata criteria group | ||||||
| Criterion | Description | Applicability | Guidance | Fully usable | Partly usable | Needs improvement |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
HDX upload | Is the COD-AB published on HDX? | Dataset | At least one indicator is satisfied | (not used) | No indicators are satisfied | |
| Public availability | Is the data available publicly? | Dataset | Options are 'public', 'private', or 'request data' | |||
| Dataset date | Is the date clearly indicated on HDX? | Dataset | 'Providing Metadata For Your Datasets On HDX' | |||
| Description | Is there a short but complete description of the dataset? | Dataset | ||||
| Source | Is the data source clearly indicated and defined on HDX? | Dataset | ||||
| Methodology or comments | Is any clarifying information provided? | Dataset | ||||
| COD tag | Is the dataset tagged as a 'COD' on HDX for easy discovery? | Dataset | ||||
| IMWG endorsement | Is the dataset endorsed by the IMWG? | Dataset | ||||
| License | Is the correct license specified on HDX? | Dataset | TO BE DISCUSSED WITHIN FIS | |||
| Single dataset | Are all the COD-AB files (HDX resources) grouped into one HDX dataset? | Dataset | Best Practice | |||
| Unique levels | Is there only one file (HDX resource) per file format per administrative level? | Dataset | Exceptions may be made. For instance, the Bangladesh COD-AB features layers with and without inland waters. Equivalent files should not be found elsewhere on HDX. | |||
| Gazeteer | Are the COD-AB attribute tables for all administrative levels available as an Excel file on HDX? | Dataset | CAN THIS BE REMOVED? IT IS REPEATED IN THE ATTRIBUTE SECTION. | |||
| CPG file | Is a .cpg file available for each ArcGIS shapefile? | Administrative layer | A .cpg file is an ArcGIS codepage that comes with the other files extensions and that can be used to define the code. CPG file is not mandatory but should be present when needed. | |||
| Metadata file | A metadata file (in .txt format) or gazeteer tab must be available to provide further information on data | Dataset | ||||
| Zip file naming | Is the zip naming convention followed? | Administrative layer | Zip file naming convention helps to standardize referencing of files NOTE LINK HAS NOT BEEN MIGRATED FROM TSP | |||
Shapefile nameing | Is the shapefile naming convention followed? | Administrative layer | The SHP files should follow the naming convention (standards). | |||
Attribute criteria group | ||||||
| Criterion |
| Description | Applicability | Guidance | Fully usable | Partly usable | Needs improvement | |
| Feature count | Are there the correct number of features? | Administrative layer | Consult reliable sources, particularly COD-PS datasets | Two indicators are satisfied | (not used) | Fewer than two indicators are satisfied |
| Complete feature names | Are there any missing feature names? | Administrative layer | ||||
| Clear field names | Column names must make sense and be clear to prevent any confusion. Is there any explanation/document about standardization of items? | Administrative layer | ||||
| Latin alphabet names | Are the feature names written in the Latin alphabet? | Administrative layer | If names are written in any alphabet which is not Latin, it must be translated into English in another column. (Link to ITOS schema) | |||
| Gazetteer (tabular) file | Are the COD-AB attribute tables for all administrative levels available as an Excel file on HDX? | Administrative layer | Best Practice | |||
| Parentage | Lower levels have higher attributes included | Administrative layer | Lower levels should include higher levels to see the AB unit it falls in. |
| Unique feature names | Do any features have duplicate names (within the same higher administrative levels)? | Administrative layer | Duplicates attributes check tutorial | |||
| P-code criteria group | ||||||
| Criterion | Description | Applicability | Guidance | Fully usable | Partly usable | Needs improvement |
| P-codes constructed | Do the P-codes incorporate values from higher levels? | Administrative level | Pcodes guidelines | Both criteria are satisfied | (not used) | Neither criteria is satisfied |
| Unique P-codes | Are the P-codes unique? | Administrative level | Duplicates attributes check tutorial | |||
| Parentage criteria group | ||||||
| Criterion | Description | Applicability | Guidance | Fully usable | Partly usable | Needs improvement |
| P-code parentage | Is the P-code hierarchy the same between levels? | Administrative level | Parentage check tutorial | Both criteria are satisfied | (not used) | Neither criteria is satisfied |
| Name parentage | Is the unit names hierarchy the same between levels? | Administrative level | Parentage check tutorial | |||
| Spatial criteria group | ||||||
| Criterion | Description | Applicability | Guidance | Fully suable | Party usable | Needs improvement |
| Features are polygons | Are all administrative boundaries represented as closed polygons? | Administrative level | How to convert polylines to polygons tutorial | All criteria are satisfied. | All criteria except 'Correct topology' are satisfied | Some criteria, apart from 'Correct topology' are not satisfied |
| Consistent coordinate systems | Is the coordinate system WGS1984 or at least consistent? | Dataset | ||||
| Geometric nesting | Is the geometric nesting clean? | Dataset | Nesting error tutorial | |||
| Correct topology | Are there topological gaps and overlaps? | Administrative level | Topology check tutorial | |||
| Country coverage | Are there unjustified gaps in the country coverage? | Administrative level | ||||
|
...