Create extended field values for processing/facility type

[caseycesari]

Overview

When the processing_type or facility_type fields are included with facilities submitted via the API or CSV, the field values are matched to facility/processing values in the taxonomy using the matching function. Users can specify single or multiple values. If any of the submitted types are unable to be matched, a parsing error is returned for that facility.

Connects #1583

Demo

Single value submitted for facility type via API

{
  "country": "US",
  "name": "Chestnut 13",
  "address": "1300 Chestnut St Philadelphia, PA 19123",
  "facility_type": "office / hq"
}

...
      "facility_type": [
        {
          "id": 53,
          "verified": false,
          "value": {
            "raw_values": "office / hq",
            "matched_values": [
              [
                "FACILITY_TYPE",
                "EXACT",
                "Office / HQ",
                "Office / HQ"
              ]
            ]
          },
          "updated_at": "2022-02-02T10:46:04.830892Z",
          "contributor_name": "Service Provider A",
          "contributor_id": 2,
          "value_count": 1,
          "is_from_claim": false,
          "field_name": "facility_type"
        }
      ],
...

Multiple values submitted for processing type via CSV

country,name,address,processing_type
US,Chestnut 20,"2000 Chestnut Street, Philadelphia, PA 19123","ginning"|"pulp making"

...
"facility_type": [{
	"id": 58,
	"verified": false,
	"value": {
		"raw_values": "ginning|\"pulp making\"",
		"matched_values": [
			["PROCESSING_TYPE", "EXACT", "Raw Material Processing or Production", "Ginning"],
			["PROCESSING_TYPE", "EXACT", "Raw Material Processing or Production", "Pulp making"]
		]
	},
	"updated_at": "2022-02-02T11:50:00.632581Z",
	"contributor_name": "Service Provider A",
	"contributor_id": 2,
	"value_count": 1,
	"is_from_claim": false,
	"field_name": "facility_type"
}],
"processing_type": [{
	"id": 57,
	"verified": false,
	"value": {
		"raw_values": "ginning|\"pulp making\"",
		"matched_values": [
			["PROCESSING_TYPE", "EXACT", "Raw Material Processing or Production", "Ginning"],
			["PROCESSING_TYPE", "EXACT", "Raw Material Processing or Production", "Pulp making"]
		]
	},
	"updated_at": "2022-02-02T11:50:00.629849Z",
	"contributor_name": "Service Provider A",
	"contributor_id": 2,
	"value_count": 1,
	"is_from_claim": false,
	"field_name": "processing_type"
}],
...

Invalid value is submitted via CSV

Invalid value is submitted via API

Notes

Currently, processing/facility type values are not displayed on the front-end. We may need a follow-up card for this, although there are some cards that may cover this (#1592? #1613?)

Testing Instructions

• Run ./scripts/update to apply the included migration
• Try to create facilities with production/facility types via the API and CSV upload. Sample JSON blobs and CSVs can be found in 1605, except replace product_type with processing_type or facility_type.
  • API
    • Test with single facility or processing type. Example: { facility_type: "raw material processing or production" }
    • Test with multiple facility to processing types. Example: { processing_type: ["cutting", "assembly"] }
    • Test with invalid type value. Example: { processing_type: "sdfjasdkjfsakdfjsf" }
    • Test creation of facility type when only processing type is specified: Example: { processing_type: "cutting" }
  • CSV
    • Test with single facility or processing type. Example: "raw material processing or production"
    • Test with multiple facility to processing types. Example: "cutting"|"assembly"
    • Test with invalid type value. Example: "dfsadfasdfsdaf"
    • Test creation of facility type when only processing type is specified. Example: "cutting"

Checklist

• fixup! commits have been squashed
• CI passes after rebase
• CHANGELOG.md updated with summary of features or fixes, following Keep a Changelog guidelines

[jwalgran]

Nice, clear implementation. I made a suggestion that I think is required to mate the expectations that submitting a value for either field sets values on both.

[jwalgran]

I think we may want to do this in reverse as well since each facility type is also included as a processing type. Better to err on the side of having the facility show up when searching either field for a particular value.

    if (raw_data.get('facility_type') and
       raw_data.get('processing_type') is None):
        raw_data['processing_type'] = raw_data['facility_type']

[caseycesari]

Ahh good point. I'll switch this up.

[jwalgran]

I think we may want to do this in reverse as well since each facility type is also included as a processing type. Better to err on the side of having the facility show up when searching either field for a particular value.

            if ((field == 'facility_type') and
               'processing_type' not in fields):
                create_extendedfield('processing_type', field_value, item,
                                     contributor)