Hi Morgan   and Ryan ,

We are also simultaneously start working on this task.

Hi Morgan and Ryan ,

We have found above field (BIT/Treaty) in both database and programming side. Currently, This field value is storing in database and it is using many places like (SQL Query, For gathering data, Programming side). 

If we will eliminate this field than we need to change all related SQL queries. we also need to change the programming to remove this field as reference.

Please suggest.

Hi Harsh ,

Further to my video below, I still think we need to proceed with the changes. Please let me know if you think it is possible to replace the BIT/TREATY data with Applicable Treaties/BITs data across the entire system.

Also, could you please highlight specifically what aspects of the application are currently using the data from BIT/TREATY, because I'm concerned if that's the case, because the data in these fields is incomplete.

Thanks,

Morgan

Problems with redundant data fields in Disputres (17-Sep-18).mp4 6.28 MB • Download

Morgan , We are looking into this and will update you soon.

Great. Thanks Harsh .

Morgan 

Hi Harsh ,

Do you have an update on this to-do?

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

We are still look into this  but till yesterday, we found that it might be difficult to eliminate or replace the the (BIT/Treaty) field data with Applicable Treaties/BITs data.

We are using both fields data for different scenarios and tasks. we are still continue to working on this and will update you soon.

Hi Harsh ,

Could specify what functions the field we want to eliminate affects on the front-end? I'm curious, because it will determine whether it's worth spending further time on this.

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

We have found that the data will be affected on Jurisprudence tool.

For e.g,

The (BIT/Treaty) field data is using for following dispute. If we eliminate the field from SQL query then the following dispute will be removed from the NON-INVESTMENT TREATY JURISPRUDENCE category.

http://dev.investorstatelawguide.com/ResearchTools/JurisprudenceCitators?id=11&type=ninv&disputeID=667981&cidsp=667981&sort=#667981

This is only one case which we identified. There are so many other cases which will be affected on front-end side.

Please suggest.

Hi Harsh ,

I don't understand how this affects the categorization of document under the Jurisprudence Citator. For example, in the example you've used above for the "United Nations Compensation Commission - Decisions of the Governing Council" dispute, nothing has been selected in the BIT/TREATY field: https://www.investorstatelawguide.com/CoreComponents/AddDisputeName?dispute_id=667981, so I don't understand how removing this field would affect documents associated with this dispute. The appearance under the NON-INVESTMENT TREATY JURISPRUDENCE should be determined by the category of the dispute document (Category B - Dispute Documents vs. Category C - Non-Investment Treaty). Could you please clarify this further?

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

We are looking into it and try to take necessary steps and remove this field from SQL queries without affecting on data. We will keep you updated.

Ok. Sounds good Harsh .

Hi Morgan and Ryan ,

We have removed BIT/TREATY field from all instances (e.g SQL Query, Code Side ) and did all necessary changes without affecting to any data on dev.islg.

Please check and let us know the feedback.

Great. Thanks Harsh .

Ryan and Paul , could you please test this issue on dev.islg to ensure there are no issues caused by this change. I'll take a look when I have time later this week.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan ,

Seems to be looking good to me on dev.islg. Paul let me know if I've missed anything.

Thanks!

Ryan

Hi Ryan and Morgan:

It looks good to me on dev.islg.

Thanks,

Paul

Thanks Ryan and Paul . I'll take a final look when I'm back in the office on Friday, and then assuming I don't discover any issues, we'll schedule this for migration next week.

Morgan

Looks good to me as well. I'm scheduling this for migration on Tuesday.

Thanks,

Morgan

Hi Morgan and Ryan ,

This task has been migrated on www.islg. Please check and confirm.

Looks good on www.islg. Thanks Harsh .

Ryan

Looks good Harsh . Marking to-do complete.

Paul and Irit , can you please ensure Tejas is aware of the change.

Thanks,

Morgan