You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
There isnt an easy place to include packaging materials. Could re-use the materials object, but packaging really should be separate from product materials provenance.
conformity.topic is currently very ESG centric. What if we want to add claims like "is Halal" or "is Organic" or "has min/max alcohol content"? Do we need to extend conformity topic codes to accomodate more general product criteria?
There isnt an easy place to include packaging materials. Could re-use the materials object, but packaging really should be separate from product materials provenance.
We are trying to model the Ingredients and Recycling Material into a DPP. Both qualify as material and all can easily be added in materialProvenance however for display purposes using the rendering engine I need some way to distinguish between ingredients and packaging. My thought was to add a field to the untp.Materials class for materialCategory being "product", "ingredient", "packaging". I also agree that packaging is so common that a separate field in the Product class does make sense.
Impacted sections
List UNTP specification page(s) that are impacted by this issue. Eg
Issue Description
Placeholder for data requirements for v1.0 release of DPP schema - discovered during pilot testing.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: