is extra indent valid?

just public? charity, private?

more quickly

This could be clarified.

I think this needs more explanation with the examples.

There is a lot of complexity here - it might be useful to help trace the compiledRelease block and versionedRelease block in another way.

format style

format style?

view of the

I don't understand this sentence. This suggests to me that there could be more than one record.

There are a large number of examples here. Would fewer convey the message?

Is 'snapshot' helpful here. Consider if releases conceptually provide a snapshot.

This compare and contrast section might benefit from bullet points in the diagram or some further simplification. Are these the simplest correct statements: Releases are the latest (ideally, real-time) updated information on specific parts of a contracting process. Subsequent releases update previously released information. Records integrate all the releases so that the most current information on the whole end-to-end contracting process is presented.

another green box with a "!" - consistency question for formatting. Consider title: Worked example: how to map OCDS codelists to other classification systems".

Consider title as "Template tool available: Field level mapping". "!" icon looks like a warning - but green.

Consider removing or reducing the extensions section from here. It is perhaps unlikely at this stage that a user would be asking what to do if they can't find a field or building block they want to use.

Is this a correct interpretation, "To help with the mapping, many closed codelist fields are paired with a detail field. Here, you can provide more detailed information on your own classification"?

Question if these lists are adding value here? Yes there are some of each type but does it help the reader to know these are the ones?

Diagram may help here. Perhaps image of a drop-down for a field key with codelist value options. Repeat diagram for open codelists with text entry field.

Relocate this sentence to the Codelists section. Revise: "Many fields make use of lightweight codelists provided by OCDS".

Could building blocks have a more distinct format so that whenever we refer to them it is more clear. consider something akin to the way fields are presented as red text in rectangular box (as below for 'titles' field)?

Consider that it may be difficult to think in terms of building blocks without knowledge of fields in use. Helping the reader to visualise the purpose and cost/benefits of building blocks may be helpful. Several comments below relate to this.

This may be unclear. Consider clarifying the purpose of this paragraph or relocate to Codelists section below, if this is the purpose. Perhaps we are saying: "When building blocks are reused, there may be different additional fields in each section related to the building block". Consider example or diagram.

Consider using an example here to help. e.g. "for example, meta data would state the language and contracting type".

consider, "Worked Example: How to obtain an OCID.

a unique contracting

Consider, "However, even in this case, information can be disclosed about the budgets, specifications and supplier selection processes".

Consider, Figure Title: A general model of contracting stages covered by the OCDS

Consider 'Concessions' versus 'concessions', and/or in-line link to wikipedia. 'Concessions' is ambiguous and perhaps avoid completely to simplify.

Consider, in-line link to our own definitions page or external site e.g. Wikipedia page.

Suggestion, "On completing these stages, you could be producing data that looks something like the contract release below. Increasingly, these data are compatible with a range of OCDS-aware tools".

Suggestions, "Check your data are valid using the validation tool" or "Check the validity of your data".

My view is that to understand this bullet requires you to click the in-line link. Suggestion, "Publish your data on the web. Consider how your published data fits within a hierarchy of approaches to publication.

"Identify data and documents..."

Consider confusion here of other 'contexts' i.e. of not a "good, works or service". Perhaps, need to say "and can be extended for a range of different contexts". Then say "for example, PPP....".

Consider, "These users want to analyze trends in prices. The also want to analyze supplier performance in terms of quality and timeliness".

Consider, "Private sector users particularly appreciate forward looking and timely information to uniquely identify procuring entities, geographic locations, sectors, and the kinds of items which are being procured".

Consider, "Information on past contracts can allow firms to identify upcoming opportunities for re-contracting. The same information can support a more competitive marketplace, as transparency creates a level playing field with information on pricing, contract dates and key deliverables".

Core vs Core extension (repeat)

Is this consistent, or perhaps confusing? A core and core extensions? Recommend distinct vocabulary.

Consider revising. Perhaps, "OCDS provides opportunities to publish URIs to provide links to other datasets.

replace with 'of'

Replace 'Using' with 'Use'

A complex sentence to simplify. Suggestion "An example of publication at this level would be for publishers to provide a CSV file of contract information. Existing field names and data structures in the CSV file could be mapped to those recommended by OCDS to facilitate publication".

Revised sentence necessary.

Table is work in progress. Consider freezing header. Consider usefulness of table with respect to vertical and horizontal sliders. Consider adding figure title "Table showing OCDS fields with their contribution to basic, intermediate and advanced publication".

Recommend figure title "The 5* framework and levels for disclosure"

Recommend figure title "Table of priority documents that publishers should provide with different levels of publication".

.

;

Figure title recommended, suggestion "The 5* Publication Framework and Levels for Disclosure".

what will this do