WMO 4680 code 02

[libertykite]

Hi,

I have a strange mapping for the wmo code 002: wi-wmo4680-2. wi-wmo4680-02: thermometer

It seems to me that the result should rather be a cloud?

[fox91]

Hi @libertykite,
can you cite what WMO 4680 says about code 02?

Thanks

[libertykite]

Hi,
i get this this table from the projet open-meteo.com :

WMO Weather interpretation codes (WW)

Code	Description
0	Clear sky
1,2,3	Mainly clear, partly cloudy, and overcast
45, 48	Fog and depositing rime fog
51,53,55	Drizzle: Light, moderate, and dense intensity
56,57	Freezing Drizzle: Light and dense intensity
61,63,65	Rain: Slight, moderate and heavy intensity
66, 67	Freezing Rain: Light and heavy intensity
71,73,75	Snow fall: Slight, moderate, and heavy intensity
77	Snow grains
80, 81, 82	Rain showers: Slight, moderate, and violent
85, 86	Snow showers slight and heavy
95	Thunderstorm: Slight or moderate
96, 99	Thunderstorm with slight and heavy hail

[BrunoCartier]

Hello,

(also trying to use this font with Open Meteo)

Quoted from:

Present weather (from manned (code 4677) and automatic (4680) stations):
https://artefacts.ceda.ac.uk/badc_datadocs/surface/code.html
(and other sources available)
The meaning of 02 seems to be:
02 - State of sky on the whole unchanged

We have to note that this is between those two :

01 - Cloud generally dissolving or becoming less developed
03 - Clouds generally forming or developing

To me, 02 means something like "same cloud level than previous hour".
This is a bit difficult to illustrate as an icon, but has some kind of shortcut, "partly-cloudy", or even "cloudy", seems to be a better representation than "thermometer".

Can we know why "thermometer" has been chosen ?

[BorisAnthony]

To me it is clear:

1,2,3	Mainly clear, partly cloudy, and overcast

It is easier to interpret 2 as "partly cloudy" than the history-aware (and thus more complex to implement) "State of sky on the whole unchanged."

Open-Meteo (the source of the table excerpt above) wrestled with this question and decided as it did to just interpret 1, 2 and 3 as cloudiness indicators. Easy and reasonable, and since I expect many people to be using Open-Meteo as a source of "weather_code", we have our answer. "Something cloudy" and not "a Thermometer."

This creates a different problem: WI has inconsistent and incomplete cloudiness icons.
e.g.:

• "wi-night-partly-cloudy" & "wi-day-sunny-overcast" have the same style icon, but refer to different conditions.
• "wi-day-cloudy" has a bigger cloud than "wi-day-sunny-overcast", so more appropriate for "overcast" (WMO 3)
• there is no intermediate step between the small cloud of "partly-cloudy"—which could be mainly clear—and "cloudy/sunny-overcast" (which as a label makes no sense… overcast means it is not sunny…)

Reading through several issues here, I sense the overarching issue with this project is there is no governance / "leadership", so nothing really happens. Which is a real shame. :(

[fox91]

Hi @BorisAnthony,

Reading through several issues here, I sense the overarching issue with this project is there is no governance / "leadership", so nothing really happens. Which is a real shame. :(

Yes, the project need contributors that can edit/add icons.
Actual icons where edited using proprietary software. There would be a need for someone to redesign the current icons using Inkscape or Figma (or at least save them in a vector SVG).
I'm a developer not a designer and there isn't found to hire one.

If you haven't seen it yet, watch this issue #228

Thanks

[BorisAnthony]

Hi @fox91 !

Before I say anything else: thank you for taking on the heavy job of maintaining this project. We are all busy and this kind of extra work is thankless and often overwhelming. What follows is not directed at you personally. 👍🏼

I don't think simple "icon design" is the issue. I am a designer/developper and I could redo/redraw/redesign all the icons, in SVG, make them fonts, and glyphs and sprites and PNGs, as well as straighten out all the API/Standards codes mappings, etc…

… but the project seems to have no leadership, or governance for decision making.
Who decides what should be done, how, and why?

issue #228 is a nice example of this. Opened in 2020, with no progress nor solution.

And no pull requests have been accepted since 2021. Why would I put all this work in if I see no indication that it would get merged in?

I would like to see Weather-Icons get updated and improved. What's holding it back?

I have read #192 and understand a bit of the history.
@Potherca 's offer in 2020 and @fox91 your reply where exactly in the right direction. Perhaps it is time to try that again?

🙌🏼

[fox91]

… but the project seems to have no leadership, or governance for decision making. Who decides what should be done, how, and why?

issue #228 is a nice example of this. Opened in 2020, with no progress nor solution.

Currently no one, unfortunately you can consider the project as archived.

And no pull requests have been accepted since 2021. Why would I put all this work in if I see no indication that it would get merged in?

I would like to see Weather-Icons get updated and improved. What's holding it back?

I have read #192 and understand a bit of the history. @Potherca 's offer in 2020 and @fox91 your reply where exactly in the right direction. Perhaps it is time to try that again?

🙌🏼

Some people have made their own fork only to stop a few commits later and end up with the same end as this project.
I myself worked on a private fork, with the intention of making it public once the work was finished, but everything stalled due to lack of time and material.

Over the years, those who needed small adjustments made them on their own (in the various forks) or were left without.

I don't think it is productive in any way to accept PR on the project in this state today.
Also because if I were to make a release today there would be a series of scripts to update/rewrite just for that.

I don't think simple "icon design" is the issue. I am a designer/developper and I could redo/redraw/redesign all the icons, in SVG, make them fonts, and glyphs and sprites and PNGs, as well as straighten out all the API/Standards codes mappings, etc…

The most promising direction I was working in was to base everything on the code used by https://github.com/twbs/icons, using our icons.
The problem is that our SVGs are not good and would at least need to be adapted, if not completely redone from scratch.
After a few attempts I had to stop the work.

As far as I'm concerned, getting your hands on the icons is the foundation of taking the work back into your own hands.

If you are available to work on it, or even just talk about it or organize the activity, I am available to take it up again.
As far as I'm concerned, it would be about working on a 3.0 version: we could publish the fork I was working on, perhaps as an alpha1 with the current icons, waiting to be able to update them and actually publish the update.