omf-io ?

[elphick]

Posting here since this is where the action is at. Looking forward to the release of this great work, particularly the python bindings.

Any objection to a python package called omf-io?
I have a draft of the type of functionality I feel is useful in omfpandas, but it could benefit from a clean slate and a name that reflects the full scope.

Will this cause any issue: namespace == omf, package == io? If so, I can add a parent namespace.

Looking for feedback, thanks.

[Tim-Evans-Seequent]

For the in-development Python bindings to this code, the eventual package name will be omf2 to separate from the existing omf package that handles the OMF v1 fie format. Some users will want to install both. That interface will return NumPy arrays rather than Pandas (or Polars) dataframes though.

I can't speak to any GMG Group trademark policy on dependent packages. I personally think it would be best to use a distinct separate top-level name, like omf2_to_pandas for example, just to help separate the two packages.

[elphick]

Thanks @Tim-Evans-Seequent. The new name omf2 makes sense - good to know.

I'll follow-up wrt the GMG Group's position. The intended scope is broader than pandas, which is what prompted the io piece.

The idea of this package is to make it trivial for python users to get their existing data into and out of an omf2 file. Reducing barrier-to-entry, if you like. A use-case, for example, being data science and estimation pipelines, rather than the typical commercial application use-case.

[elphick]

It seems to me that pyvista could make light work of many format conversions. I'm aware of the omfvista package that currently supports omf1. As the name suggests, its focus is on visualisation.

Could visualisation be considered another output format of an io package?

@banesullivan, would your preference be to keep the viz solely in omfvista with omf2 support?

[banesullivan]

I think there is great benefit to keeping visualization code and file format/IO code separate.

Is OMFv2 underway/gaining momentum? Curious where it stands today

[elphick]

Yeah, sure thing Bane - all good.

I can't speak for the GMG Group, but have engaged the project leads and shared my enthusiasm for the release. I get the sense it is still moving.

[aussieben]

@elphick - from the working group level I don't see a problem with omf-io, so feel free to go ahead with that.

[elphick]

Thanks for the confirmation @aussieben .