Thanks Moritz for explaining that. I suspected that there was something incorrect with my expectations, but I'm glad that (1) was caught.
Steve On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 10:04 AM, GRASS GIS <[email protected]> wrote: > #3352: Behavior of v.sort.points > --------------------------+------------------------- > Reporter: spawley | Owner: grass-dev@… > Type: defect | Status: closed > Priority: normal | Milestone: 7.4.0 > Component: Addons | Version: unspecified > Resolution: fixed | Keywords: > CPU: Unspecified | Platform: Linux > --------------------------+------------------------- > > Comment (by mlennert): > > Replying to [comment:2 mlennert]: > > Replying to [ticket:3352 spawley]: > > > > > (2) even if 'cat' is the first column, sorting by an integer column > does not appear to be sorting point datasets in numeric order. Example > from the nc_spm location: > > > > > > v.sort.points input=firestations@PERMANENT output=firestations_sorted > column=ID > > > > > > The order of the points based on opening the attribute table, and the > relationship between the 'ID' column and 'cat' appears to be the same as > the original dataset, where 'ID' was not in ascending order. > > > > This is not a bug: cat values are conserved, i.e. the same points have > the same cat value in the input and the output. However, points are in a > different order in the file after v.sort.points. Category values of > objects do not define order. > > Try > > > {{{ > d.vect map=firestations icon=basic/circle size=0.5 size_column=ID > d.vect map=firestations_sorted icon=basic/circle size=0.5 size_column=ID > }}} > > and compare the two maps to see the difference. > > Moritz > > -- > Ticket URL: <https://trac.osgeo.org/grass/ticket/3352#comment:3> > GRASS GIS <https://grass.osgeo.org> > >
_______________________________________________ grass-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-dev
