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

Control for attributes parameter #1

Closed
nilsnolde opened this issue Oct 12, 2018 · 9 comments
Closed

Control for attributes parameter #1

nilsnolde opened this issue Oct 12, 2018 · 9 comments

Comments

@nilsnolde
Copy link

Might be of interest to include the reachability attribute to the isochrone output or alternatively add a control parameter for which attributes to get.

Also, we have a new smoothing parameter. It's not really documented yet, but it's working. Here you can see some documentation on it inline. Its range is [0.0, 1.0] and it's a float.

@itsozz
Copy link
Contributor

itsozz commented Oct 12, 2018

Hi Nils, thanks very much for the suggestions. Regarding the first point, just checking I'm correct that this is the reachfactor attribute? If so, is there any further information available on this other than what is mentioned in the API docs that it is a score between 0 and 1? e.g. What the score is based on etc.

I'll have a look at the smoothing parameter as well, thanks for letting me know.

@nilsnolde
Copy link
Author

Oops, so sorry, didn't see this one.

You're right, it's not documented.. It basically calculates the ratio of actual isochrone area over the theoretically possible area one could reach if there were no roads (i.e. as the crow flies). That assumes a certain speed and is not actually modelled like the routing, just a plain circular "isochrone/equidistant" with constant mode speed. Hope you understood what I mean.

We're rebuilding a bit of that currently, since these constant speeds were waaay too high (50 km/h for bike haha), so reachibility was ALWAYS < 0.2 or so, even in super accessible areas like central squares in cities.

@itsozz
Copy link
Contributor

itsozz commented Oct 22, 2018

No problem at all Nils, really appreciate your feedback and input. Thanks very much for the clarification. Please could you let us know when you've finished updating this aspect?

@itsozz
Copy link
Contributor

itsozz commented Jun 10, 2019

Hi @nilsnolde, just picking up on this one again whilst preparing the new version of the plugin to use the V2 API. I've implemented the smoothing parameter and am now looking at reachfactor. Please can you confirm that reachfactor is only returned when range_type = "time" not "distance"?

@nilsnolde
Copy link
Author

Hm, shouldn't be, but you're right! I'll look into it real quick and might open an issue on our side.

@itsozz
Copy link
Contributor

itsozz commented Jun 10, 2019

Thanks as always Nils for your fast response. Hope it's not a pain to fix!

@nilsnolde
Copy link
Author

No worries:)

I actually did fix that while fixing general issues with reachfactor here. However, it's not in master yet, which confuses me a little. Let me talk to our git lord tmrw when he's back and get back to this.

@itsozz
Copy link
Contributor

itsozz commented Jun 11, 2019

That's great, glad you've already fixed it! I'll handle it in the plugin so that if reachfactor is requested and it's not available it won't error, then when your change is present in master it will just work as expected.

Thanks again Nils!

itsozz added a commit that referenced this issue Jun 11, 2019
…or a choice of: area, reach_factor and total_pop to be returned from the API. Previously area and total_pop were hard-coded. This was the suggestion from @nilsnolde in issue #1. Updated the documentation following this change and previous commit afdaaa6 which implemented the smoothing parameter, also suggested by @nilsnolde in #1.
@itsozz
Copy link
Contributor

itsozz commented Jun 14, 2019

Release v2.0.0 implements everything discussed here so closing this now. Nils, please feel free to add further comments regarding reachfactor if neccessary. Thanks very much.

@itsozz itsozz closed this as completed Jun 14, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants