GNOME Bugzilla – Bug 160135
Location love - Belgium
Last modified: 2004-12-22 21:47:04 UTC
Patch for Locations.xml.in for locations in Belgium, as requested on http://planet.gnome.org and on http://mail.gnome.org/archives/gnome-love/2004-November/msg00030.html. All locations are cities. I'm not sure if I was suppose to create a <city>...</city> tag around each of these locations. Seems like a lot of dublicated work, so I didn't do that. Also, Belgium is divided in 'regions' which is not completely the same as 'states'. I didn't create a <state>...</state> nor did I group the locations based on region. I can do that if asked (only 3 regions/states). Hope I didn't make mistakes...
Created attachment 34379 [details] [review] Patch for Locations.xml.in
You don't need the city tags, those are simply if you want to group multiple locations in one city or town, etc. It would be nice to have the regions, particularly if there are a lot of cities (I forget how many cities there are in the list of Belgium). You can use the <state> tag, it's really just a way of structuring the data, very US centric. What is important is that people will be able to find their location quickly. Example I live in the City of Subiaco, which is part of Greater Perth. I simply say I live in Perth. So I would select Australia->Western Australia->Perth->Subiaco (if there was a Subiaco weather station).
Ah ok. So the 'states' don't have to be really 'states'. It can be 'province' or something like that. I've changed the patch so the locations (=cities) are grouped by province using the <state> tags. There are only 23 Belgian locations, now grouped into 10 provinces. Also: in the comments at the end of the file it says: """ Locations listed in 11-22-2004 METAR file but not listed above. Many already have another entry in the same city or location; others, mostly Canada, need to be placed in their province which the file doesn't specify Belgium EBSU;St-Hubert;;50-02N;005-24E """ 'St-Hubert' equals the 'Saint-Hubert' location. It has another code (EBSH instead of EBSU) but the location is equal, so 99% it is the same. So the patch removes this comment for Belgium.
Created attachment 34395 [details] [review] Patch for Locations.xml.in - locations grouped by 'state' New patch: the locations are grouped by state (actually: by province).
Cool! The last thing you might want to do is, rather then deleting the extra St. Hubert, combine them into one city so you have: <city> <_name>St. Huburt.</_name> <location> <_name>Location 1</_name> ... </location> <location> <_name>Location 2</_name> ... </location> </city> For even more points, use the coordinates to work out where in St. Hubert these places are, although that may be difficult without living there.
I'm not local to Saint-Hubert, so I can't differentiate between the two. Moreover, the coordinates are _exactly_ the same so only a person knowing where exactly these stations are located could tell you what EBSU points to and what EBSH points to. All of the Belgian locations are airports (military or civil) btw and I doubt there are two airports in a small town as Saint-Hubert, so my guess is that it's just a renaming of the code or maybe an error in a previous version (looking at the naming coventions of these codes EBSH seems more logical than EBSU).
wrt comment #3: I just checked the METAR list I was referencing when synching the files; there's no entry for station EBSH. My comment for this station can be ignored.
Committed. Thankyou.