I'm writing a little program (in c++, primarily) that will store optional information about the location of an object. Sort of like this:
class loc {
private:
double lat;
double lon;
string address;
}
class foo {
private:
string name;
loc location;
}
I'm wondering what data format standards are extant that are relevant to the design of the "loc" class. I'm not, at this point, writing anything GIS or navigation related, but I would like to be able to handle and provide data to external libraries/programs with minimal complication. As such, finding some sort of standard for this type of data would be helpful.
I've seen some standards like the W3C API, but I'm not clear on how widely accepted that is. Is it acceptable to store only lat/lon and assume WGS84? Is it necessary to store the geodesy info as well?
Is it reasonable to have one class encompass both geodetic location and textual "address" information? Or is there a consensus that this should be separate?
I suggest you to go for Struct Address (Include more detailed information like street,House,City etc) for address, this way you can add much more details. If you are asking the user to input the address then it would be better approach.
Your approach is also fine as the level of details depends on the set of operation that you want to do. for example if you want to find the differences between altitudes of two points then you might have to add Altitude as data member.
At the end It depends on the requirement
P.S About the Geodesy doubt...the answer depends on the type of operation you want to use.
Related
I'm looking for a string representation of arbitrary fields inside protocol buffer messages. Is there any library that implements this? I've looked at using field masks, however they don't have a strong support for repeated fields.
Protocol buffer message and field descriptors provide field access by name. This allows you to find a particular field using a path and to erase it, if that's what you are asking for (if not, I'd recommend to expand the question to include an example for what you'd like to do).
One corresponding Java method is getDescriptorForType (the return type is a message descriptor, where you'll find field descriptors).
There is a similar descriptor API for C++ (in Java, you could theoretically also use reflection).
This API is not available in light mode.
I am trying to map an existing domain into HL7 FHIR.
So far it was pretty easy to find FHIR resources that more or less represent the same data and can be used for that purpose. But now I am running into a problem of which I am not sure how to solve it.
The existing domain allows that data can be anonymized depending on the users access level. e.g. a patient's name or address might be removed and marked as anonymized. Other data will be pseudonymised, for example a the birthdate in 1980 will be replaced with 01.01.1980. An Age of 37 will be replaced with a category of 30-40.
So I am unsure how to integrate that into the FHIR domain. I was thinking I could create an extension holding a boolean, indicating if a value was anonymized or not and always replace or remove the original value. This might work, but I will run into big problems when the anonymized value is of a different type than the original value (e.g. Age is replaced by a range of values)
Is that even a valid approach? I thought this might be common problem, but I could not find any examples where people described methods of how to mark data as altered. Unfortunately the documentation at http://build.fhir.org/extensibility-registry.html does not contain anything that would help my case.
You can use security labels for this purpose (Resource.meta.security). Take a look at REDACTED and SUBSETTED in the security label value set: https://www.hl7.org/fhir/valueset-security-labels.html
If you need to convey a data type other than the one allowed by the resource (e.g. wanting to convey a range rather than a birthdate), you'd need to use an extension. (Note that dates are valid even if you only include the year.)
type MyRequest struct {
email string `json:"email" valid:"email,required"`
}
json is used to (un)marshal JSON structures, but what valid is for?
It's for anything that reads it. There's no official registry of tags (unless you count the ones used by the standard library).
Based on the semantics of the tag's value, one can reasonably assume it's used by some (likely more than one) validation library of some sort. The best way to find out its intended use is to look at the code that sets the tag, and see if it uses (or is used by) some library that sets that tag. Unfortunately, there's no mechanical way to do this--you'll probably be looking through "import" lines and grepping package source code.
I think it is used by this package: https://github.com/asaskevich/govalidator
Is there a data structure within LiveCode that can be used as a "holder" for associated data, letting me handle it collectively? I come from a Java / Javascript / C background so I am looking for a Class or Struct sort of data structure.
I've found examples of Groups, which seem to have some of this functionality, but it feels a bit like I'm bending the language to meet my needs.
As a specific example, suppose I had an image field on my screen that would randomly display an image and, when pressed, play an associated sound clip. I'd expect to create a list of "structures" that contained the path to the image and the path to the associated sound clip, and use that data to populate the image field and to decide what sound clip to play.
Would a Group be the correct structure to use in this case? Or am I approaching this in a way that isn't really fitting with the way LiveCode works?
It takes a little getting used to, but the xTalk world is much simpler and more open than any ordinary procedural language. So much of what you once had to manage is no longer required.
So when splash21 said that you could store all your image and sound references in a custom property, he was really saying that the LiveCode environment contains intrinsic, high level functionality that makes these sorts of things instantly accessible, and the only thing required of you is to call for them, and they simply work.
The only way to appreciate this is to make a few simple programs, to really see what is possible. Make your application. Everything you mentioned can be accomplished with perhaps a dozen lines of code in a single handler. I recommend that you join the LiveCode use list and forums. The community is vibrant and eager to help, frequently with full blown solutions to specific problems, but more importantly, as guides and mentors to new users
Craig Newman
Arrays in LiveCode are actually associative arrays (like hash maps). A key is associated with a value. The value might be as well an array.
Chapter 5.5.7 of the User's Guide says
Array elements may contain nested or sub-elements, making them multi-dimensional.
This type of array is ideal for processing hierarchical data structures such as trees or
XML. To access a sub-element, simply declare it using an additional set of square
brackets.
put "ABC" into myVariable["myKeyName"][“aChildElement”]
see also
How to store pictures in a stack?
Dave- I'm hoping to get a struct-like container implemented in the near future. Meanwhile you can, as splash21 mentioned, use custom properties (or better yet, custom property sets) to do what you want. This will give you a pseudo-struct for each object and you can implement the file and sound specifications into the properties. And if you use that in conjunction with a behavior object you'll end up very close to a real inheritable class formation.
I'm trying to use the ABPerson method searchElementForProperty:... to create a moderately complex search. In particular, I want to find the set of people who have an email address that ends with "foo.com", and are NOT part of the pre-populated group "My workunit".
Matching against just the email address seems to be trivial. Creating a conjunction against the (inverse of the) group membership seems impossible.
Yes, I can do this by doing the obvious explicit cross-checking myself, but if the point of having search functionality directly in Address Book is to optimize performance, wouldn't it make sense for the search facility to be sufficiently complete to be able to do this?
Thanks in advance,
Tony
You could potentially copy all the data from the address book into a Core Data store and use predicates to work with that data. Predicates tend to be very useful when building complex queries.
Predicate Programming Guide
In this case you would have to get all contacts ([[AddressBook sharedAddressBook] people]) and also have a Core Data entity called Contact (or something similar) that would save names, emails, addresses and other properties from the ABPerson object.
Having this you can probably create an NSPredicate to filter with the conditions you want.
Groups reference their members according to recordId. The only way I have found to perform such an operation is here: how to find parent groups of a person. It is not a simple thing like we would like. It seems that Apple is not concerned about group searching which would be extremely useful.