Hamish wrote: > Ben wrote: >> So from a user point of view, getting rid of "-c" in >> GRASS 7 would remove another source of uncertainty. > > if that means that tasks like the ones I described > in the third bullet point of this email: > http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/grass-user/2011-December/062818.html > are no longer possible, then I can not support that. > IMO relying on v.external as work-around to be able to > deal with that class of data is a bit of a cop-out.
In case of overlapping areas, v.in.ogr assigns multiple categories to the same centroid, but only if the -c flag is not used. Therefore extracting areas by category value or where statement may extract several areas that share the same category. There is your original polygon. This is not possible if v.in.ogr is used with the -c flag. IOW, the task refered to above is only possible if v.in.gr does its cleaning, and not possible if the -c flag is used because the area in question may not have been built because of corrupt topology. Another argument for, not against the removal of the -c flag. Markus M > > > Hamish > _______________________________________________ > grass-user mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user _______________________________________________ grass-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
