Fix: Allow Special DOI Cases Used in Public Administration Tests

[MaurizioPilia]

The validation previously excluded certain DOI codes that are actually valid and commonly used in test environments by public administration entities. These codes, although not assigned to real individuals, should be considered valid for all practical purposes.

This change ensures that the validation logic aligns with real-world usage, preventing false negatives when handling official test scenarios.

Let me know if any adjustments are needed! 🚀

[yozachar]

Could you please provide some references?

[MaurizioPilia]

Hi! According to the official government website where the control digit calculation is explained, there is no mention of any specific DOIs being considered invalid.

Moreover, the DOIs that were previously excluded are validated correctly in the most commonly used public tools:
• https://testingdatagenerator.com/doi.html
• https://www.letranif.com/?num=00000000&ok=ok
• https://www.validardni.es/

Therefore, it seems clear that these codes should not be excluded in the validation. Thank you for reviewing!

[yozachar]

If these are valid, can you please put them in the valid nif test cases?

[MaurizioPilia]

Done

[yozachar]

Hi! According to the official government website where the control digit calculation is explained, there is no mention of any specific DOIs being considered invalid.

Moreover, the DOIs that were previously excluded are validated correctly in the most commonly used public tools: • https://testingdatagenerator.com/doi.html • https://www.letranif.com/?num=00000000&ok=ok • https://www.validardni.es/

Therefore, it seems clear that these codes should not be excluded in the validation. Thank you for reviewing!

Thanks @MaurizioPilia!