The language doesn't help, so please forgive me if I haven't been clear: I don't expect from grass something more or something less, I was wondering if with the new grass 7 features (like direct ogr access) it was possible to make some daily operations faster.
I frequently use SAGA for spatial processing, so I have its features in mind... So I just was looking how to unify the various needs (more or less rigorous) in a single environent, like grass. giovanni 2010/4/19 Moritz Lennert <[email protected]> > Jumping into the debate, since it raises some fundamental questions in my > eyes; > > > On 19/04/10 17:46, G. Allegri wrote: > >> No problem, this is not what I expect. I just expect a user to be able >> to import a polygonal layer, without worrying about topology correctness >> (clean/build operations), and do spatial operations on it. Obviously the >> correctness of results depend on the operation the user is doing (and >> it's his problem) but, i.e. a geometrical clip will be always correct, I >> think... >> > > The questions here for me are: > > > - What is the actual error linked to doing operations on non-topological > formats ? > > - Why do you absolutely want GRASS to do this ? If all you want to do is > simple geometry operations on spaghetti files, you can easily do this with > most of the available open source viewers / GIS, such as QGIS, gvSIG, uDIG, > etc or even directly with ogr. Why go through the trouble of using GRASS for > that ? > > > These operations should be quite fast for native vectors with topology. >>> >> >> With "rapidly" I meant: load data, do-the-op, save the results. I'm sure >> that the native grass data structures can deal more efficiently then SF >> structures.... but often a user prefer to wait a minute more for the >> operation to end, then working a minute to have to manage the data >> cleaness (more often it takes much more then a minute, and it doesn't >> worth it!) >> >> > Yes, although not that rapidly because pseudo-topology needs to be >> built first. Polygons do not need to be clean, but then nobody can >> guarantee for the results. >> >> Ok, but the user just have to wait and wath the progress bar >> completing... that's ok from his perspective :) >> > > I find it a bit suspicious when user comfort is apparently put so much > higher in priority then correctness of results... > > Moritz >
_______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
