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
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Nov 16, 2023. It is now read-only.
This is because the id contains level and reportingunitid, but if you request fipscode-level data there is no reportingunitid value.
This could be solved in two ways:
Forbid users from using --results-level fipscode in the API and the CLI, with a helpful error message suggesting they use the ru level, since it rolls up to the county level
Allow ids to be composed using self.reportingunitid or self.fipscode in the models
Not a blocker for our project, but being able to request less data (for those not using New England townships) would help make pipelines faster, and either way having a valid option that results in duplicate/invalid ids can introduce annoying bugs.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
You can see the issue in even the first few rows of data from 2016 (see
1683-polid-1702-None
and
1683-polid-64583-None
):This is because the
id
containslevel
andreportingunitid
, but if you requestfipscode
-level data there is noreportingunitid
value.This could be solved in two ways:
--results-level fipscode
in the API and the CLI, with a helpful error message suggesting they use theru
level, since it rolls up to the county levelid
s to be composed usingself.reportingunitid or self.fipscode
in the modelsNot a blocker for our project, but being able to request less data (for those not using New England townships) would help make pipelines faster, and either way having a valid option that results in duplicate/invalid
id
s can introduce annoying bugs.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: