Rewrite Logic for Search...and potentially, other things as well.

[alanjosephwilliams]

Pinging @jmoe

This is the most significant piece of development work required to get To The Trails released as a reference implementation of the Open Trail System Specification.

Old Spec Model, Current App Model

"Trailheads" are associated with "Named Trails", which are composed of "Trail Segments". Trail Segments are host to "use attributes".

The user interacts with "Trailheads". This is true on both the map—the only interactive feature is a "Trailhead", which when activate, has/can have multiple "Named Trails" you can carousel through.

When the user searches for "biking and equestrian trails", they are shown "Named Trails" ordered by the proximity of the associated "Trailhead" to the user's current location. Whether or not those "Named Trails" show up in the search results is based on whether all of its "Trail Segments" have 'true' flags on their "biking" and "equestrian" properties.

This is complicated, and was a tradeoff made to accomodate data publishers. Turns out though, the tradeoff didn't hold up, and this setup was bad for publishers, too.

Current Spec Model, Future/Required App Model

Thus, the latest v1.1 of the Open Trail System Specification is different.

"Trailheads" are now associated with "Trail Segments", which are in turn referenced by "Named Trails".

When a user interacts with a "Trailhead", we will want to include all the "Named Trails" associated with each "Trail Segment" the Trailhead is directly associated with.

When a user searches for "biking and equestrian", we will want to show all "Named Trails" that are composed of an array of "Trail Segments" where each segment has a "true" flag for both its "biking" and "equestrian" properties. We will want to order those by the proximity of the nearest "Trailhead" associated with the nearest "Trail Segment".

[JoaquinCardozo]

@alanjosephwilliams Alan, It seems that we are not obtaining the information about what trail segments are associated with a trailhead.

On the webservice, for a given trailhead we see this:

"trailIds":[ 921, 877 ],

Which is fine for the current search, but cannot be used for the new requirements. Should we wait for the new API in order to do this? (Ticket #154 )

[jmoe]

There is some up to data available on OuterSpatial for Cleveland Metro Parks

http://www.outerspatial.com/organizations/cleveland-metro-parks/opentrails/stewards.csv

http://www.outerspatial.com/organizations/cleveland-metro-parks/opentrails/named_trails.csv

http://www.outerspatial.com/organizations/cleveland-metro-parks/opentrails/trail_segments.geojson

http://www.outerspatial.com/organizations/cleveland-metro-parks/opentrails/trailheads.geojson

I will still be providing API docs for list organizations and retrieving OpenTrails endpoints, hopefully tomorrow. :-)

[jmoe]

http://www.outerspatial.com/organizations/cleveland-metro-parks/opentrails/stewards.json

http://www.outerspatial.com/organizations/cleveland-metro-parks/opentrails/named_trails.json

Are JSON versions of the csv files.

[JoaquinCardozo]

@jmoe, @alanjosephwilliams I am having some problems with the new models. I've changed the endpoints and some attributes on the definitions of the models, and now I get an error on the Leaflet library. This is the error message:

TypeError: Cannot read property 'lat' of undefined at Object.o.LatLngBounds.intersects (http://localhost:8000/ios/www/js/lib/leaflet/leaflet.js:6:16794) at null. (http://localhost:8000/ios/www/js/application/TrailsCanvasLayer.js:92:39)

I'm not sure what is the problem, maybe some of you know something about it...

[jmoe]

Hey @JoaquinCardozo I am pretty far along with migrating the models over. I hadn't heard anything from you in a couple of days so I wasn't sure what was going. I will push my branch up and you can see how far along I am. I've got TrailSegments and Trails moved over and now I'm working on Trailheads. Let's sync on Monday morning.

[JoaquinCardozo]

Hey @jmoe , let me know if you have something new to push.

We are already reading the CSV, converting into models, and fixed some issues that came up (this is on the PR that was merged 3 days ago).

After that we had some problems like the one that I sent. I saw that you worked over the weekend. I will sync with your latest commits and see where you are at.

Thanks, Joaquin

[jmoe]

Yeah, I made lots of progress over the last week. Let's do a standup today at 9 to catchup.

[jmoe]

I've pushed a ton of stuff to the development branch. So please check that out and merge rebase your feature branch. Let's chat on slack as well. Can you join there?

[jmoe]

I need to implement the CSV endpoints in the API, so right now we are doing all JSON.

[JoaquinCardozo]

Yes, I will be there at 9. I am checking your commits right now.

[jmoe]

So, it seems like this all working for now! Anything to report @JoaquinCardozo