Relaton 2.0: do not prefix ISO to iso-tc identifiers

[opoudjis]

iso-tc identifiers must not be prefixed with "ISO". I am getting this with the new gem in metanorma gem spec, e.g. rspec ./spec/collection/collection_complex_spec.rb:415 # Metanorma::Collection render html & build doc, pdf, xml files from YAML collection with renamed outputs

       -               <docidentifier type="iso-tc">17301</docidentifier>
       +               <docidentifier type="iso-tc">ISO 17301</docidentifier>

This is happening when the bibdata of an ISO document is <docidentifier type="iso-tc">17301</docidentifier> is imported into relaton-iso, and then exported back to XML as part of a collection.

[andrew2net]

@opoudjis should type="iso-tc" render just number?

The pubid-iso adds ISO publisher by default.

Pubid::Iso::Identifier.parse('17301').to_s
=> "ISO 17301"

we could render just number

Pubid::Iso::Identifier.parse('17301').number
=> "17301"

but if there are other ID components, like part, they will be lost

Pubid::Iso::Identifier.parse('17301-1').number
=> "17301"

If we need to render not only number then it's Pubid's issue. It needs to implement special rendering option for type="iso-tc"

[opoudjis]

I don't think it should be prefixing "ISO" ever, but let me research that tonight my time, I'm at work now.

[opoudjis]

These are what ISO calls N-numbers.

https://helpdesk-docs.iso.org/article/489-create-document

In https://www.metanorma.org/author/iso/ref/document-attributes/#distribution-group , I say that they should be prefixed:

:tc-docnumber:
The document number assigned by a distribution group (also called the “N-document number” or the “N-number”), typically a Technical Committee, a Subcommittee or a Working Group. Must include the short reference of the distribution group, since documents may circulate widely;

Example 19. Setting the N-document number for a distribution group
For a document circulated in ISO/TC 154 as "N 1218" (instead of "N 1218"):

:tc-docnumber: ISO/TC 154 N 1218

They will NOT contain part numbers, they are a completely separate number. I am saying on the foregoing that they must contain the technical committee number. But TBH, I don't think you have access to that number from screen-scraping: it is an internal identifier of a project, for drafts. I do not believe you should be generating it at all.

[opoudjis]

Oh, you're not generating it, I'm passing it to you in that instance, right?

In that case, leave it alone, and don't prefix it. Too much uncertainty here to begin with with those numbers.