Agreed completely :) Gary
On Sunday, 26 July 2020 09:37:41 UTC+10, Greg Troxel wrote: > > gjr80 writes: > > > You will notice the highlight on the word radiation (but not the word > > field) in my original post, this was in reference to the WeeWX field > named > > radiation, not to something known as 'field radiation'. > > Sorry, reading in plain text so I did not actually notice that :-) > > > I don't disagree but irrespective the GW1000 API has no ability to > return > > data that is suitable to be placed in the WeeWX field called radiation. > If > > Sure, didn't mean to come across as questioning that as all. > > > the user wishes to derive values to place in any WeeWX fields that of > > course is their call and whilst WeeWX has the machinery to do such > things > > it is left as an exercise for the user. > > In the glorious future, there might be a stdconvert routine to create > radiation from illuminace, perhaps enabled with a config variable > becusae 1) not everybody wants it and 2) it's not really sound. I meant > to be in agreement and offer pointers to further info for people looking > into this. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "weewx-user" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/weewx-user/26657fff-83ac-4d07-b396-19ea0757829do%40googlegroups.com.
