Anyone else thing it would be helpful to have the API output JSON in GeoJSON format? That way the station location could be dropped directly on a map with it’s associated information. I’m an Esri guy and could find a lot of use for this.
Perhaps you could explain how it would improve it for your goal? I guess it simplifies the API calls you require?
Here are my comments regarding current issues with the location data.
The location information from the Tempest and the weatherflow database is not accurate because the location is manually entered for the hub. Then the height of the Tempest is also manually entered. There can be several Tempests or Sky or Air linked to a single hub with a single location yet I have Skys 5km away from the hub.
I think the location should be a database field of the sensor, not of the hub which is only the data transmission device.
Then there is the situation of people moving devices without manually updating its location.
So location information in the current design is only approximate.
For my purpose of wind at different locations each Sky or Tempest has very different readings yet they each do not have their own location from the weatherflow data because they all communicate to a single hub location.
Cheers Ian 
1 Like
Or setting the public location different from the actual location.
1 Like
Your assumption is correct. The software I use (Esri) can read GeoJSON natively so it won’t require any JSON parsing to get location information. I can drop the location, whether accurate or not, onto a map and view it’s attributes.