Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

How to handle a question whose type changes but name doesn't? #151

Open
jnm opened this issue Jan 25, 2018 · 1 comment · Fixed by #152 · May be fixed by #187
Open

How to handle a question whose type changes but name doesn't? #151

jnm opened this issue Jan 25, 2018 · 1 comment · Fixed by #152 · May be fixed by #187
Assignees

Comments

@jnm
Copy link
Member

jnm commented Jan 25, 2018

Example form choices:

list_name name label
service carry_out Carry-out
service sit_down Sit-down
service delivery Delivery

Example form survey:

name type label
restaurant_name text What's the name of the restaurant?
restaurant_type select_one service What service does this restaurant offer?

An export for this form might look like:

restaurant_name restaurant_type
Duchess carry_out
Leméac sit_down

Now, change the survey to:

name type label
restaurant_name text What's the name of the restaurant?
restaurant_type select_multiple service What services does this restaurant offer?

Add some more submissions, and an export might look like:

restaurant_name restaurant_type restaurant_type/carry_out restaurant_type/sit_down restaurant_type/delivery version
Duchess carry_out       1
Leméac sit_down       1
Masala Kitchen carry_out sit_down delivery 1 1 1 2
Jerry Carryout carry_out 1 0 0 2

That wouldn't actually happen, because only the first definition of restaurant_type is used. However, after #149 is fixed, a change from select_one to select_multiple should be okay.

So, what's the problem?

Consider a change the other way, from a select_multiple to a select_one. Consider a select question whose choices are removed in a later version. Consider a geopoint that changes to a text.

Should fields whose type changes but name remains the same just be treated as separate fields altogether? Or should we treat them with more nuance? Presumably, changes between types that export to only one column should be okay.

https://www.flowdock.com/app/kobotoolbox/kobo/threads/B2sSngalmsnI5QXU-F75efX36Ip

@joshuaberetta
Copy link
Member

Additionally: #60 (comment)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment