You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Yes, that would be the correct way to correct the data.
In the INTERLIS models the value "unknown" has a special meaning and is not the same as an empty (or Null) value. "unknown" means that someone has invested time and money to find out about a certain attribute, but did not find another value. Therefore writing "unknow" would imply that you did not find out who is the dataowner / provider. So my question is whether we should not better leave it empty as we do now also with the other attributes, so it would be clearer, that this data is missing.
In the next release (2020) of SIA405 Abwasser / VSA-DSS these two attributes will also be referenced to organisation (as e.g. owner) in the INTERLIS model and will therefore also be treated as reference keys. The user then has to fill them out anyway to have a valid export.
We can leave it empty, but this will make the output of the demo dataset invalid again. So we'd have to make a new release of the demo dataset with populated dataowner/dataprovider columns. I suggest to leave that for a further improvement.
qgepqwat2ili/qgepqwat2ili/qgep/export.py
Line 67 in 50b8b87
@olivierdalang Do I understand right, that it is set to "unknown" if is Null in QGEP at the moment
?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: