Problem/Motivation
Some site builder will need a sex field.
Steps to reproduce
Proposed resolution
Include a sex field, but do not include it on any contact bundles.
➡️ This follows ISO/IEC 5218, an international standard used in medical and census data
| Code | Label | Notes | 0 | Unknown | Data unavailable |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Male | Assigned male at birth |
| 2 | Female | Assigned female at birth |
| 9 | Not applicable | For non-human or administrative records |
No significance is to be placed upon the fact that “Male” is coded “1” and “Female” is coded “2”. This
document was developed based upon predominant practices of the countries involved and does not convey any meaning of importance, ranking or any other basis that can imply discrimination.
Used in healthcare, research, and government contexts that recognize exceptions and unknown data.
Standard developed by Health Level Seven International (HL7)
| Code | Label | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| M | Male | Assigned male at birth |
| F | Female | Assigned female at birth |
| I | Intersex | Anatomical/physiological variance |
| U | Unknown | Data unavailable |
| N | Not applicable | For non-human or administrative records |
We could also include:
P
Prefer not to say
The field not being required can serve a similar intend.
Remaining tasks
User interface changes
API changes
Data model changes
Only add the field storage
| Comment | File | Size | Author |
|---|---|---|---|
| #3 | ISO-IEC-5218-2022-sexes.pdf | 1006.87 KB | bluegeek9 |
Issue fork crm-3555594
Show commands
Start within a Git clone of the project using the version control instructions.
Or, if you do not have SSH keys set up on git.drupalcode.org:
Comments
Comment #2
bluegeek9 commentedComment #3
bluegeek9 commentedComment #4
bluegeek9 commentedComment #5
bluegeek9 commentedComment #7
bluegeek9 commentedThe admin login to the tugboat instance is admin:admin
Comment #9
jdleonardFixing version.
Comment #11
svendecabooterProvided some feedback.
If it is not deemed appropriate, then I think this is ready to go. Is there a reason the MR is still in draft state?
Comment #12
jdleonardAside: I'm not sure the base module should be providing and maintaining fields like this. This feels like something better suited to a separate module or recipe.
Comment #13
bluegeek9 commentedMaking a plan to indicate that this is meant for discussion before implementation. The ultimate solution might not seide in the crm namespace/project.
Comment #16
bluegeek9 commentedComment #17
bluegeek9 commented