Inconsistent identification of station in plots and metrics
The filenames of the summary plots (used in the report) do not include the location code. The location code is, however, listed on the plots for each trace.
The StationID
column in the RotD50 metrics table does include the location code.
Thus, we have an inconsistency in the naming scheme between the plots and the corresponding StationID
column in the metrics tables. Ideally, we should be using location code wherever possible, so that we don't lose information.
Proposed solution
We include the location code in the plot filenames if it is the same across all traces AND include it in the RotD50 and similar metrics for multiple components if it is the same across those components. This eliminates any ambiguity for the majority of cases.
If the location code is different across components, I am not sure what we should do for the plot filename.
We should consider whether it makes sense to only allow computation of RotD50 for cases where the location code is the same across components. @emthompson mentioned there are cases where components have different location codes. Is this only true for cases where the instruments are separated by some difference and metrics combining components may not be appropriate?