Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[KYC Match / KYC Fill-in] Coexistence of aggregated fields and separate fields for Name and Address #87

Open
ToshiWakayama-KDDI opened this issue May 22, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@ToshiWakayama-KDDI
Copy link
Collaborator

Problem description

To consider coexisting of aggregated fields and separete fields for Name and Address attributes
(Spin off from Issue #65, item No.5)

BR

@HuubAppelboom
Copy link
Collaborator

HuubAppelboom commented May 22, 2024

In general, when you can expect spelling mistakes in parts of the data, I think we need to support separate fields to avoid having too many false negatives for the Match product.

For example, when there is a spelling mistake in a streetname or a streetnumber, this makes a large difference.

Example: the correct addres is "Weststreet 185".
If the CSP submits "Wetstreet" and "185", you could return as answer that the streetName matches for 95% (applying fuzzy name matching logic), and that the streetNumber is "true". That gives the CSP the possibility to accept the customer input (and optionally ask the end user to check the streetName once more.
In case the CSP submits "Weststreet 18" as a combined item, you don't have the possibiliy to apply fuzzy name matching logic, because that would give a wrong results, because the spelling mistake is now in the streetNumber.

For KYC fill-in this does not apply, here you can choose to work with combined fields (although many CSP's would appreciate to receive the data separate).

@HuubAppelboom
Copy link
Collaborator

Regarding providing givenName and familiyName as separte items, this way you can make a disctinction as a CSP between cases where there is no match at all between the data submitted and the data of the contract owner, case where only the family name matches (and you can still assume there is a relationship between the end user and the contract owner), or when there is a full match.

For KYC fill-in this does not apply, here you can choose to work with combined fields (although many CSP's would appreciate to receive the data separate).

For some use cases a match on just the family name can be acceptable (for example when placing an ecommerce order), and for other cases you may require an exact match on all fields (for cases where more privavcy sensitive data is being shared, or an age check is relevant). By providing the data separate you can let the CSP decide what to do.

@ToshiWakayama-KDDI ToshiWakayama-KDDI changed the title [KYC Match / KYC Fill-in] Coexistance of aggregated fields and separete fields for Name and Address [KYC Match / KYC Fill-in] Coexistence of aggregated fields and separate fields for Name and Address May 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants