Closed crotwell closed 3 years ago
Should abbreviation be allowed for location level? If so, and the loc code is empty, you get:
It would be a weird anomaly if it were not allowed, I suspect folks would do it anyway.
FDSN:XXABC which might be confusing as it looks a lot like the station level abbreviation:
That shouldn't be confusing for software. I think our best approach here to to make sure the specification is as clear and simple as possible (which I think it is now but maybe I've missed something), i.e. parse on _
delimiters and you get the fields is really simple and clear.
Also, the converter example code doesn't handle this currently:
python3 fdsn_source_identifiers.py FDSN:XX_ABC_00 Input SourceID: 'FDSN:XX_ABC_00' => Network: 'XX' Station: 'ABC' Location: '00'
Now fixed and produces:
% fdsn_source_identifiers.py FDSN:XX_ABC_ [v1.0]
Input SourceID: 'FDSN:XX_ABC_'
=> Network: 'XX' Station: 'ABC' Location: ''
Which is the proper inverse of:
% ./fdsn_source_identifiers.py XX ABC '' [v1.0]
Input Network: 'XX' Station: 'ABC' Location: ''
=> SourceID: 'FDSN:XX_ABC_'
Should abbreviation be allowed for location level? If so, and the loc code is empty, you get:
which might be confusing as it looks a lot like the station level abbreviation:
There may not be a good use case for the location level abbreviation, so dropping it might be the right answer, at least for now.
Also, the converter example code doesn't handle this currently:
but
so it looks like a station level abbreviation:
Have I mentioned how much I hate empty loc codes? :(