[Talk-GB] Tagging a Driving Test Centre

[Mark Goodge]

On 02/02/2023 20:43, Andy Mabbett wrote:
> There is  partial response to my FoI request; we have test centre
> data, including internal UIDs, lat/ long (note my earlier comment
> about imprecision), types of tests offered, and postal addresses:
> 
>     https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/list_of_driving_test_centres
> 
> But no UPRNs, and no mention of an Open Government Licence.
> 
> I've submitted a request for an internal review on those points.

It's also a good example of what spreadsheets look like when they're 
produced by people who don't really understand spreadsheets :-)

Specifically, the way that "Permanent", "Remote", "Temporary" and 
"TTTTC" (whatever that means) testing stations are grouped together with 
  a repeated header line is pretty dim. It means you can't use any 
built-in sorting capabilities (eg, to sort by ID, or postcode), because 
then you'll lose visibility of what category each station is in. And it 
also means you can't do a quick and easy convert to csv and then import 
into a database using LOAD DATA INFILE. Instead, you'd need to script an 
import to handle the interstitial headings.

There are two correct ways to include the category data. One, given that 
it's Excel, would be to have each category as a separate sheet. The 
other is to have the category as a separate column, possibly immediately 
after the name. Either would be acceptable. This mess isn't, really. But 
it is typical of a lot of data request FOIs. The FOI officer responsible 
for the response often has no concept of there being any use of the data 
other than simply reading it.

Maybe what you should have done is ask for the data in GeoJSON or 
Shapefile format. That might have blown a few minds.

Mark