Skip to first unread message

Owen Ambur

Jan 3, 2023, 11:11:47 PMJan 3
to Gayanthika Udeshani,
Gaya, I posted the revised file with each of the goals and objectives reasonably well named at

I also documented the stakeholders that are implicit in some of their descriptions.

I discovered why my XForm was finding a couple of the elements invalid, where I did not see the red Xs before due to all of the extra, empty stakeholder elements.  Under Performance Indicator 2.1.2, "th" was appended to the 5 and the 9 in the Rank column.  I removed those characters and was then able to save the file using the XForm to apply the stylesheet.  

If I were to take the time to name that Performance Indicator, I'd call it "Exports".

Since the numbers appear in the <NumberOfUnits> elements, it is redundant to include them in the <Description> elements as well.  It wouldn't take too much extra effort to manually remove them, particularly if I were also taking the time to name the Performance Indicators.  However, it would be better if you could automate that part of the process.

I also noticed that a bunch of the Partner stakeholders are named the same but with different Role Descriptions.  Having checked the spreadsheet, I see that is because you captured the data in the Type of Partner Entity column instead of the Name of Partner entity column.  Hopefully, that won't take too much effort to correct.  It would also be good to include the Type of Partner Entity data in the Stakeholder Description field, but depending upon how much effort it may require, it is not essential since I don't think it adds much value.

From my perspective, we're getting pretty close to having something worth showing.  I'll take a look at a few more of the files to see how they shape up.  In addition to correcting the partner Stakeholder Names, I'll look forward to learning if you think there is more that you can do with them without too much more effort before I start naming all of the goals and objectives and we begin to publicize our joint effort.

Owen Ambur

Jan 4, 2023, 1:29:44 PMJan 4
to gayaudeshani,
Gaya, while it would be nice if you could automate the naming of performance indicators, doing so is similar to naming the goals and objectives.  It appears to require human intervention.  (It might be interesting to ask ChatGPT to take a crack at selecting the primary nouns from some goal, objective, and performance indicator descriptions, but unless that process were automated, it would be easier just to manually name them.)

As per my previous message, I have now named Performance Indicator 2.1.2 "Exports".  In the <NumberOfUnits> for that indicator, I also had to remove the "th" again from the 5 and 9 for the target and actual rankings.

While I was at it, I also named all of the other performance indicators in the revised document, at

Here are some other ways the output could be improved:
  1. Change the document type from Strategic_Plan to Performance_Report.
  2. Include the <StartDate> and <EndDate> for the reports.  I had understood the reports were for FY2022, starting on July 1, 2021, and ending on June 30, 2022.  The title of the document reads "Fiscal Year 2017-18 Accountability Report".  However, that appears to be a mistake.  Column A in the Strategic Development tab of the spreadsheet indicates the plan is for FY2023.  So the <StartDate>s & <EndDate>s for both the document as well as each of the <TargetResult>s should probably be July 1, 2022, and June 30, 2023, respectively.
  3. Assuming that is correct, the those dates for the <ActualResult>s from column K should probably be July 1, 2021, and June 30, 2022, respectively.
  4. Note also that the numbers in column K are "baselines".  To capture that meaning, the term "Status" should be defaulted into the <Descriptor> element for each Performance Indicator and the term "Baseline" should be defaulted into the <DescriptorValue> element.
  5. It would be good to populate the Submitter Information elements, i.e., the <GivenName>, <Surname> and <EmailAddress>.  If you'd like to include yours, that would be fine with me.  Otherwise feel free to use mine (but not my phone number).
  6. The numbers are still being redundantly displayed in the <ActualResult><Description>s and should be removed, as they have been from the <TargetResult><Description>s.
The names, descriptions, and role descriptions now look good for the partner stakeholders.  However, I noticed that they have all been typed as "Groups" whereas most of them are Organizations.  Since they cannot automatically be distinguished as such, it probably would be best to leave the <StakeholderTypeType> attribute blank.  It doesn't add much value anyway, at least not until such time as query services take advantage of it and I don't have any immediate plans to do that in the query service that Naval is developing for me.

Since there is a lot of complexity in the points enumerated above, I created another instance of the file that demonstrated them at

On Wednesday, January 4, 2023 at 06:50:20 AM EST, gayaudeshani <> wrote:

I didn't understand 'If I were to take the time to name that Performance Indicator, I'd call it "Exports".'
do you want me to automate something?

Removed numberof elements from description, modified the stakeholders, check the zip file
Reply all
Reply to author
0 new messages