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

Build ehighways resolution units #318

Closed
brynpickering opened this issue Apr 8, 2024 · 6 comments · Fixed by #336 or #370
Closed

Build ehighways resolution units #318

brynpickering opened this issue Apr 8, 2024 · 6 comments · Fixed by #336 or #370
Assignees
Labels
data enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@brynpickering
Copy link
Member

What can be improved?

Take regional level NUTS3 data using the correct NUTS year and aggregate up to eHighways resolution. See "data/statistical_units_to_ehighways_regions.csv" in sector-coupled repo for aggregation mapping

Version

1.2.0.dev

@jnnr
Copy link
Contributor

jnnr commented Apr 9, 2024

How are ehighways units prepared in Sector-coupled EC currently? They are prepared by the rule custom_units, which calls the script aggregate_statistical_units_to_custom_regions.py

@timtroendle
Copy link
Member

This seems to be a duplicate of #319, do you agree? Building the shapes seems to be 90% of #319 and because #319 is a feature while this here is not, I'd close this in favour of #318.

@jonathan-peel
Copy link
Contributor

Terminology:
NUTS3 spatial units (in polygon data types) -> eHighways spatial units (polygons)

@jonathan-peel
Copy link
Contributor

Desired output: units.geojson file with MultiPolygons all the spatial units for the chosen spatial resolution (regional, national, continental, ehighways, etc.)

@timtroendle
Copy link
Member

I am continuing my nagging here: in the sake of working feature-driven, I would aim for this issue (or #319) to build in eHighways as a feature, not as some data that possibly may be used as a model feature in the future.

Building the shapes sounds like 90% of the way anyway.

@jnnr
Copy link
Contributor

jnnr commented Apr 11, 2024

I agree, @timtroendle. Closing this in favor of #319

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
data enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
4 participants