Warnings for MWI flash-flood are identified by triggerValue 0

[gulfaraz]

Who requested this spike

@gulfaraz

Functional or Technical Spike

In flood (and probably other hazards), we identify warnings and triggers with a value greater than 0 - 0.3 for low warning, 0.7 for medium warning, and 1.0 for trigger. In this definition 0 is considered as no warning and no trigger.

In flash-flood (and typhoon), we identify warnings as place codes with a value 0, and triggers as place codes with a value 1.

User Story

As a dev
I want to use consistent logic across countries and hazards
So that I can solve user needs in understandable and maintainable code

Acceptance Criteria

• Identify the definitions of warnings and triggers in the app
• Fix inconsistencies and communicate changes to the relevant people
• Document the decision in this issue and add this definition to the wiki
• Create a follow up task to implement the changes

Timebox

This should take 30 mins to describe the problem, about 2 hours to research the existing implementation, 60 mins to agree on the new consistent approach.

[jannisvisser]

@gulfaraz I found this spike in the customer success board. Shouldn't it be in product board?

[jannisvisser]

Refinement

• Currently 2 different ways of identifying warnings (floods vs flash-floods/typhoon)
• To fix this would be refactoring, for which there's probably no priority > create follow-up item still possible
• But already valuable for documentation purposes
• Create as-is vs to-be documentation (in this issue) > agree on form of documentation/diagram