Redundancy and check fields

[timgdavies]

An issues related to the draft conceptual model

In some cases, redundancy of data can be useful to check accuracy. For example, when cross-referencing a personStatement by ‘id’, there could also be a requirement to include the ‘name’ value of the target personStatement. This can help detect incorrect identifiers.

Although counts can be calculated from the number of entries in an array (for example), it can be useful in some cases to have explicit counts to check no data has gone missing.

For example, the UK PSC API responses include ‘ceased_count’ and ‘active_count’ values. Our proposed entityStatement object could include fields to specify the number of known beneficial ownership statements that are active or superseded, allowing consuming systems to check if they are missing important data.

Views are welcome on approaches to redundancy and check fields, and where they could or would be useful.