Geometrypath
I think I’d like to verify the “unverified use case” of “attributes and boundaries supplied separately in the same data package” (if I understand it correctly)…
// OPTIONAL (TBD): local or web path to an actual source of those boundaries, in the absence of a codelist-resolving service. // this could also support the (unverified) use case of attributes and boundaries supplied separately in the same DP. "geometrypath": "http://..."
Given a data package with
- datapackage.json
- tourists_by_district_2016.csv
- tourism_districts.geojson (tourism district
geometry
anddistrict-name
attribute)
tourists_by_district_2016.csv
tourism district | visitors 2016 |
---|---|
a | 10000 |
b | 23000 |
Should the data package be
{
"profile": "data-package",
"name": "tourists_2016",
"version": "0.1.0",
"resources": [
{
"path": "tourists_by_district_2016.csv",
"name": "tourists_by_district_2016",
"profile": "tabular-data-resource",
"locations": {
"type": "boundary_id",
"field": "tourism district",
"codelist": "district-name",
"geometrypath": "tourism_districts.geojson"
},
"schema": {
"fields": [
{
"name": "tourism district",
"type": "string",
"format": "default",
"constraints": {
"required": true,
"unique": true
}
},
{
"name": "visitors 2016",
"type": "integer",
"format": "default"
}
]
},
"primaryKeys": [
"tourism district"
]
},
{
"path": "tourism_districts.geojson",
"name": "tourism_districts",
"profile": "data-resource",
"locations": {
"type": "geojson"
},
"schema": {
"fields": [
{
"name": "district-name",
"type": "string",
"format": "default",
"constraints": {
"required": true,
"unique": true
}
}
]
},
"primaryKeys": [
"district-name"
]
}
]
}
- Is the linking correct?
- Are the
constraints
andprimaryKeys
needed in the geojson schema?