Open RocketD0g opened 5 years ago
On station names (currently designated as location
in our data format, I think it might be truest and most transparent to the originating source to keep the name as-is.
Currently the names (or the location
parameter) are not picked by us, but rather designated as how the originating source presents it. This allows some transparency for a given agency to understand which station is which on our system, while the new stationID
type parameter will allow a universal, persistent method of identifying the station, no matter if the originating source changes the name. Does this make sense? (Especially to @maschu09 and @jflasher)
Makes sense to me. Put another way, I am not sure how we'd come up with something different than both stationID
and location
to use as a station name.
@RocketD0g you captured exactly what I intended to say: station name shoul dremain under full control of the originating agency/data provider. The two suggestions I made were only meant to cast this into some very loose rules that can be used for creating databases and software that makes use of the location
parameter, i.e. fixing a length and data type.
This comment is relayed and originally from @maschu09. This comment is relayed and originally from @maschu09 (7+ 8 of 8 to transport over to GH):