Open stephenholleran opened 5 months ago
@stephenholleran I vote for remote_sensing_config
. I'm happy to either review a possible change or take this one if we agree to proceed with it. As discussed in the call, probably we should pack all the breaking changes in one DEV branch.
@stephenholleran I'm open to start working in all the breaking changes that we have been discussing. We can discuss when to start in our next bi-weekly meeting.
@kersting I have created a branch called dev-breaking-changes
where we can work on the breaking changes without it impacting the development of the none breaking changes work which get merged into the dev
branch.
https://github.com/IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard/tree/dev-breaking-changes
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe. While working on issue #254 in the PR #257 we realised that these additional properties (
logger_stated_device_datum_plane_height_m
andlogger_stated_device_orientation_deg
) could be applied to sodars too. Therefore the table these have gone under,lidar_config
is not appropriate anymore.Describe the solution you'd like We should rename
lidar_config
toremote_sensing_config
orrsd_config
orremote_sensing_device_config
or ??????Describe alternatives you've considered We can leave it as is but on our bi-weekly call, https://github.com/IEA-Task-43/digital_wra_data_standard/discussions/129#discussioncomment-9537330, we thought this wouldn't be a good idea and alienates sodars.
Additional context This would be a breaking change.