All

 

To change the subject a little, a while back I heard talk of SAFE adopting
Idevio's lossless compression technology.

I believe this throws wavelet maths at geometry to park unwanted coordinates
off to one side, giving you reversible generalisation.

The output is multi-resolution geometry which unpacks itself appropriately
in the client depending on viewing scale.

The target audience is people wanting zillions of features deliverable via
web or file to any size client.

If enough people ask for it you might get it!

 

Bruce.

 

Bruce Harold

Geographic Information Solutions

 <http://www.gis.co.nz> www.gis.co.nz

Ph. (64) (0) 9 537 3247

Mb. (+64) (0) 21 2995995

  _____  

From: [email protected] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
jamison_leach
Sent: Wednesday, 4 April 2007 8:37 a.m.
To: [email protected]
Subject: [fme] Re: "lossless" line generalization

 

Good afternoon,

In order to test the LineGeneralizer's results (using the Douglas
algorithm and a zero tolerance), I first used the Densify transformer
to add vertices to my lines. These densified lines were then processed
by the LineGeneralizer, and I hoped all the vertices added by Densify
would be removed. However, LineGeneralizer appears to only remove some
of the added (unnecessary) vertices. I haven't yet figured out why
this is.

Regards,
JD

--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:fme%40yahoogroups.com> com, "mark2atsafe"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I think the LineGeneralizer will do what you need if you use the
> Douglas(-Poiker) algorithm and set the tolerance to zero. When the
> tolerance is zero it should just remove intermediate points on a
> straight line, without changing the shape of the feature.
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Mark
> 
> 
> --- In [EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:fme%40yahoogroups.com> com,
"jamison_leach" <hemsidan@> wrote:
> >
> > Good afternoon,
> > 
> > Does anyone know if there is there a way to remove unnecessary
> > vertices from lines? By unnecessary, I mean vertices that contribute
> > nothing to the shape of the line. If we were to compute an angle at
> > such vertices, it would be 180 degrees. Using the Generalizer
> > transformer would eliminate non-redundant vertices and change the
> > shape of my lines, which is undesirable, even if the shape would
> > change only slightly.
> > 
> > Many thanks, 
> > J.D. Leach
> > U.S. Census Bureau
> >
>

 

Reply via email to