Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove layer definition "ideal_vgi_lulc" #221

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jan 12, 2022

Conversation

matthiasschaub
Copy link
Collaborator

@matthiasschaub matthiasschaub commented Jan 3, 2022

Description

Layer definition "IDEAL-VGI Land Use and Land Cover" has been a valid
layer in combination with the Mapping Saturation indicator.
But often time the area of the land-use gets smaller over time instead
of bigger, which makes it not suitable for the Mapping Saturation.
Beside that the Layer has not been used in any Report.

Checklist

  • I have updated my branch to main (e.g. through git rebase main)
    - [ ] My code follows the style guide and was checked with pre-commit before committing
    - [ ] I have commented my code
    - [ ] I have added sufficient unit and integration tests
  • I have updated the CHANGELOG.md
  • Decide on whether below mentioned alternatives would be better the solution proposed in this PR

@matthiasschaub
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Two alternatives come to mind. Both would keep the layer definition and ...

  1. Remove layer definition as valid layer for the Mapping Saturation indicator
  2. Keep as it was and add checks to the Mapping Saturation indicator

@Hagellach37
Copy link
Contributor

Hey @matthiasschaub ,
I think from my perspective it might be enough to remove this from the definitions.py file and keep in the layer definitions.

Hagellach37
Hagellach37 previously approved these changes Jan 10, 2022
the Mapping Saturation indicator.

Layer definition "IDEAL-VGI Land Use and Land Cover" has been a valid
layer in combination with the Mapping Saturation indicator.
But often time the area of the land-use gets smaller over time instead
of bigger, which makes it not suitable for the Mapping Saturation.
Also the layer definition is not used in any Report.
Copy link
Contributor

@Hagellach37 Hagellach37 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Nice

@matthiasschaub matthiasschaub merged commit bccc3bb into main Jan 12, 2022
@matthiasschaub matthiasschaub deleted the indicator-layer-combination branch January 12, 2022 14:22
matthiasschaub added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 2, 2022
description in the case that the indicator could not been calculated
(instead of raising an error which will not be handed down to the API).
matthiasschaub added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 3, 2022
description in the case that the indicator could not been calculated
(instead of raising an error which will not be handed down to the API).
matthiasschaub added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 7, 2022
description in the case that the indicator could not been calculated
(instead of raising an error which will not be handed down to the API).

Update lulc layer definition
matthiasschaub added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 9, 2022
description in the case that the indicator could not been calculated
(instead of raising an error which will not be handed down to the API).

Update lulc layer definition
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Reverse #221 and add error handling to MappingSaturation Indicator
2 participants