Skip to content

Conversation

istvans-mn
Copy link
Collaborator

Added new ODIM ACDD attributes.

@istvans-mn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@mats-knmi @ritvje Please review it. This PR breaks the test, but we can fix it if we agree.

def_msg["properties"]["platform_name"] = "[" + nod + "]"

cc = str(nod)[:2].lower()
if def_msg["properties"]["naming_authority"] == "eu.eumetnet":
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is the idea that if the naming authority is already given in the message template, we don't change it? Or why is this if clause here?

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If it is a national product and the naming_authority is the default("eu.eumentnet"), the ingester updates naming_authority by country_naming_auth . Ingester skips this block when naming_authority was filled by NMS.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This was a single site case, I added the composite case also, see: 1a94444

@mats-knmi
Copy link
Contributor

Sorry for the late response. To me this looks good, if you can update the test (files) in this PR as well then we can review in this same PR also what the impact is of this change to the example test files.

@istvans-mn
Copy link
Collaborator Author

...if you can update the test (files) in this PR as well then we can review in this same PR also what the impact is of this change to the example test files.

I updated test files.

@mats-knmi
Copy link
Contributor

This pull request looks fine by me, other than the 2 small comments I had. I really like the way this pull request looks with the updated tests. Now I can see not just what the code changes are, but also what the impact is on the test files. This makes reviewing very easy.

@ritvje
Copy link
Contributor

ritvje commented Oct 23, 2025

This looks good to me.

@istvans-mn istvans-mn merged commit 8c29481 into main Oct 23, 2025
2 checks passed
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants