Commit Graph

5 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Chris Hill-Scott
850571cb8c Recognise that broadcast messages include content
The content attribute needs to be added to the model so we can use it
later.
2020-10-09 15:41:38 +01:00
Chris Hill-Scott
04e53c72b3 Update shapes to bring in fixes for Bristol
I emailed the Geography team at the ONS:

> Hi geography team,
>
> I work on GOV.UK Notify, which is a service run by Government Digital Service (part of the Cabinet Office). I was given your email address by [redacted] who’s been helping answer some of my questions on the cross-government Slack.
>
> We’re using some of the boundary datasets from the Open Geography Portal, and mostly they’ve been excellent.
>
> In the abstract, the problem we’re trying to solve is, given a point outside an area, what is the minimum distance to a point within that area. So, for example, if a crow was somewhere in Cardiff, what’s the shortest distance it would have to fly to reach somewhere in the Bristol local authority district?
>
> We’ve noticed some problems with the data that means our calculations would be wrong. We’ve noticed this around Torquay, Norwich and Bristol. Here are some screenshots of Bristol, from the generalised and full resolution boundaries:
>
> The artefacts I’ve highlighted are closer to Cardiff than any actual part of the land area of Bristol. They are either:
> - in the sea
> - land that’s part of North Somerset
>
> I suspect that this is being caused by the process of clipping the actual region of Bristol (which, unusually, extends into the water) to the mean high water line.
>
> I’ve worked around this by filtering out any polygons that are smaller than ~7,500m². It’s a bit hacky because parts of the Scilly Isles start disappearing. That’s not a problem for what I’m working on, but it would be nice to not need the hack.
>
> So my questions would be:
>
> - Is there a better way to remove these artefacts than filtering by area?
> - Is there a plan to remove these artefacts from the data in future releases?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Chris

They emailed back to say:

> Hi Chris
>
> Thank you for your enquiry.
>
> We  have completed the amendments to the LAD MAY 2020 BFC and BGC boundaries as mentioned so you should be able to download them from the portal now.
>
> Hope this helps.
>
> Kind regards
> [redacted]

This commit brings in the files they’ve updated. We still have to do
some filtering (but now at a higher resolution) because they haven’t
fixed Norwich yet. I’ll email them  separately about that.
2020-09-25 12:24:23 +01:00
Chris Hill-Scott
3d9d663b27 Refactor coordinate processing into Polygons class
We have a bunch of stuff for doing lat/long transformation in the
`BroadcastMessage` class. This is not a good separation of concerns, now
that we have a separate class for dealing with polygons and coordinates.
2020-08-26 09:17:03 +01:00
Chris Hill-Scott
be16c0187f Rename electoral wards to local areas
We’ve observed people using ‘national’ and ‘local’ during user research.
It has less tongue-twisting ambiguity than county vs country.

But we think that maybe just getting rid of ‘counties’ is enough to
disambiguate them. So this commit just takes the ‘local’ concept.

This commit also gives the libraries and areas new IDs, which means if
we want to rename them in the future it won’t be a breaking change.
2020-08-13 17:54:28 +01:00
Chris Hill-Scott
969e7a6dbd Show how a broadcast will overspill selected area
Broadcasting is not a precise technology, because:
- cell towers are directional
- their range varies depending on whether they are 2, 3, 4, or 5G
  (the higher the bandwidth the shorter the range)
- in urban areas the towers are more densely packed, so a phone is
  likely to have a greater choice of tower to connect to, and will
  favour a closer one (which has a stronger signal)
- topography and even weather can affect the range of a tower

So it’s good for us to visually indicate that the broadcast is not as
precise as the boundaries of the area, because it gives the person
sending the message an indication of how the technology works.

At the same time we have a restriction on the number of polygons we
think and area can have, so we’ve done some work to make versions of
polygons which are simplified and buffered (see
https://github.com/alphagov/notifications-utils/pull/769 for context).

Serendipitously, the simplified and buffered polygons are larger and
smoother than the detailed polygons we’ve got from the GeoJSON files. So
they naturally give the impression of covering an area which is wider
and less precise.

So this commit takes those simple polygons and uses them to render the
blue fill. This makes the blue fill extend outside the black stroke,
which is still using the detailed polygons direct from the GeoJSON.
2020-08-13 11:20:49 +01:00