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

Include the vehicle form factor a station is able to hold in station_information #614

Open
2 tasks
matt-wirtz opened this issue Mar 21, 2024 · 3 comments
Open
2 tasks
Labels

Comments

@matt-wirtz
Copy link

matt-wirtz commented Mar 21, 2024

What is the issue and why is it an issue?

As a consumer we want to inform the user about what vehicle form factors a station is able to hold. A vehicle form factor must be assigned to each vehicle type in vehicle_types. But in station_information and stations[].vehicle_types_capacity[] only the vehicle type ids are given the station is able to hold. In order to get the vehicle form factors one has to go through all vehicle types and get the corresponding form factor from vehicle_types.

From a consumer perspective it would be easier if the vehicle form factor info is included in the station_information too.

Please describe some potential solutions you have considered (even if they aren’t related to GBFS).

Include a optional array of vehicle form factors a station is able to hold in station_information.

Is your potential solution a breaking change?

  • Yes
  • [ X ] No
  • Unsure
@richfab
Copy link
Contributor

richfab commented Mar 22, 2024

Hello @matt-wirtz 👋

Thank you for this contribution.

I understand that it would be simpler for a consumer to have the form factors directly in station_information.

On the other hand, I fear that duplicating this information will lead to discrepancies in the data if the list of form factors is not properly kept up to date in both files by the publisher.

I'm curious to hear what other GBFS users think and how they solved it.

Thank you!

@testower
Copy link
Contributor

This is a slippery slope. There's a lot of examples of where it could be useful to denormalize, but at the expense of duplicating and increase payload sizes. I don't think it's a good trade-off.

@mobilitydataio
Copy link
Contributor

This discussion has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed in 30 days if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

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

No branches or pull requests

4 participants