API: distinction between libpysal and networkx graphs

[martinfleis]

We currently use both libpysal and nx graphs, and unfortunately use the term graph for both. Compare this:

momepy/momepy/graph.py

Line 67 in 889fb44

def meshedness(graph, radius=5, name="meshedness", distance=None, verbose=True):

and this

momepy/momepy/functional/_distribution.py

Line 105 in 889fb44

def alignment(orientation: Series, graph: Graph) -> Series:

I don't think it is wise to do that. And since the contents of the graph.py module will likely not change signficantly, we should probably use better name within the new functional module for libpysal graphs to avoid confusion.

[jGaboardi]

Some initial ideas:

• ps_graph
• lib_graph
• lps_graph

[martinfleis]

what about leaving "graph" and using spatial_weights?

[jGaboardi]

I was thinking something like that, but then thought it would be counterproductive in our general efforts to move away from the "weights" terminology on the PySAL side of things.

[martinfleis]

Are we trying to move away from weights terminology or just weights class?

[u3ks]

neighbors_graph ?

[jGaboardi]

Are we trying to move away from weights terminology or just weights class?

I guess I am not sure. I thought so, but maybe I misinterpreted. Perhaps we can get other devs' opinions on that?

neighbors_graph ?

As for that, I think it works well. We could even truncate it we wanted: neigh_graph.

[martinfleis]

Let's pick it up during the next PySAL dev meeting.

[martinfleis]

We have decided to keep the name Graph in libpysal. Here, we have functions that use one or the other. I will just add type hints to the graph module with explicit nx.Graph typing.