Re: GeoSitesBackend update

[dave <davidr sucs org>]

On Fri, 2004-02-27 at 17:11, Edd Dumbill wrote:

> I'd go the other way, if you wanted to refactor...  the members I've got
> here are debatable, but for illustration
> 
>   Locale (name, region, country)
>     |
>     +--- Point (has lat,long too)
>     +--- PhoneDistrict (has STD code)
>     +--- PostalDistrict (has postal code, also conceivably lat,long)
> 
> The Point there should probably become City.

I'm not sure if you mean that Point (I agree this should really be City)
etc. should be members or subclasses of Locale. If the former I don't
think this is a good idea; these define different regions/concepts which
don't necessarily correspond very well and can't easily be aggregated
into a single object. In the latter case, I think this works well; the
backend can just deal with a Locale which provides city
name,region,country. Please could you clarify which you meant?

Incidentally, the PostalDistrict will be based on lat/long, not city
name as with PhoneDist. (as this is the data that seems to be
available).

> However, this refactoring is likely overkill for now.

Possibly. But I have some spare time to work on dashboard for the next
month or so, so I'm willing to take some time to get it right. It's not
a huge amount of work, so I think it's worthwhile.

dave