Spot merging #75

New issue

Open

opened 2025-11-02 16:23:16 +00:00 by ian · 1 comment

ian commented

2025-11-02 16:23:16 +00:00

Owner

Currently, each spot that arrives in our system is treated as unique, and displayed as such.

If we were to get, in quick succession, a POTA spot of GB-0001 with a comment "also WWFF GFF-0001", a WWFF spot of GFF-0001 with comment "also POTA GB-0001", and a DX cluster spot "POTA GB-0001 WWFF GFF-0001", those would all end up looking nearly identical when they appear in the API. The source, source IDs and timestamp would be slightly different, but the sig_refs would contain both references in all three cases, and of course the DX and DE callsigns are the same.

This leads to three separate spots on the map, all in roughly the same place.

Should we find a way to consolidate them?

This is a bit of a can of worms:

Exactly how similar to two spots need to be?
How close in time do they need to be?
What about spots without sig_refs?

Currently, each spot that arrives in our system is treated as unique, and displayed as such. If we were to get, in quick succession, a POTA spot of GB-0001 with a comment "also WWFF GFF-0001", a WWFF spot of GFF-0001 with comment "also POTA GB-0001", and a DX cluster spot "POTA GB-0001 WWFF GFF-0001", those would all end up looking nearly identical when they appear in the API. The source, source IDs and timestamp would be slightly different, but the sig_refs would contain both references in all three cases, and of course the DX and DE callsigns are the same. This leads to three separate spots on the map, all in roughly the same place. Should we find a way to consolidate them? This is a bit of a can of worms: 1. Exactly *how* similar to two spots need to be? 2. How close in time do they need to be? 3. What about spots without sig_refs?

ian added the

enhancement

maybe

labels

2025-11-02 16:23:16 +00:00

W1CDN commented

2025-11-30 18:31:14 +00:00

I think even if you consolidate them, you would need a lookup to associate with each de_call, because those may be in different locations.

I'm thinking in map view, but I'm not sure about table/list view. I suppose you'd also want to show that one-to-many relationship there.

I think even if you consolidate them, you would need a lookup to associate with each de_call, because those may be in different locations. I'm thinking in map view, but I'm not sure about table/list view. I suppose you'd also want to show that one-to-many relationship there.