Hi,
I used the following method for the triangulation. I use polygons as
constraints as well. Input Geometry is multipoint of all polygon vertices.
Then polygons are used as constraints in a GeometryCollection. Was it
because i used polygon geometry itself as constraints rather than its line
segments?
public static Geometry TriangulationBuilder (MultiPoint mp,
ArrayList<Geometry> alg, double tolerance)
{
GeometryFactory gf = new GeometryFactory();
ConformingDelaunayTriangulationBuilder cdtb = new
ConformingDelaunayTriangulationBuilder();
//constriant geometry
Geometry consegs = gf.buildGeometry(alg);
//GeometryCollection g_cp = (GeometryCollection)
gf.createGeometryCollection(als);
//set sites for triangulation
cdtb.setSites(mp);
//set constraints
cdtb.setConstraints(consegs);
//set tolerance -0.00001
cdtb.setTolerance(tolerance);
//Retrieving triangles
Geometry Trigeom = cdtb.getTriangles(gf);
return Trigeom;
}
On Wed, Dec 4, 2013 at 3:37 PM, <
[email protected]> wrote:
> Send Jts-topo-suite-user mailing list submissions to
> [email protected]
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jts-topo-suite-user
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> [email protected]
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> [email protected]
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Jts-topo-suite-user digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: Delaunay Triangulation Snapping Tolerance
> (Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2013 10:44:00 +0000
> From: Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [Jts-topo-suite-user] Delaunay Triangulation Snapping
> Tolerance
> To: [email protected]
> Message-ID:
> <CAEMA-4gdNDTamnPjJ+U1mQSysFZX==
> [email protected]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Hi,
>
> Following are the polygons i used to run triangulation. In order to run it,
> i had to increase tolerance to 3.7. Data has some attached polygons.
> However, for different data with attached polygons, triangulation executed
> with very less tolerance (0.001).
>
> POLYGON ((540499.45 182736.05, 540500 182734.45, 540501 182731.75, 540500
> 182731.4, 540499.05 182731.1, 540500 182728.3, 540500.2 182727.65,
> 540501.15 182727.45, 540500.45 182723.65, 540500 182723.65, 540499.95
> 182723.65, 540492.95 182724.8, 540492.75 182723.4, 540499.05 182722.6,
> 540498.7 182720.05, 540495.35 182720.15, 540492.35 182718.9, 540488.6
> 182719.55, 540489.2 182723.35, 540490.05 182727.95, 540493.5 182730.1,
> 540492.25 182733.65, 540499.45 182736.05))
>
> POLYGON ((540429.14 182733.57, 540426.14 182742.85, 540430.78 182744.35,
> 540433.78 182735.07, 540433.71 182735.05, 540429.14 182733.57))
> POLYGON ((540450.88 182745.69, 540452.37 182741.08, 540447.72 182739.58,
> 540444.72 182748.85, 540449.37 182750.35, 540450.88 182745.69))
>
> POLYGON ((540426.14 182742.85, 540429.14 182733.57, 540429.07 182733.55,
> 540424.49 182732.07, 540421.49 182741.35, 540426.14 182742.85))
>
> POLYGON ((540440.08 182747.35, 540443.07 182738.07, 540438.43 182736.57,
> 540435.43 182745.85, 540440.08 182747.35))
>
> POLYGON ((540443.07 182738.07, 540440.08 182747.35, 540444.72 182748.85,
> 540447.72 182739.58, 540443.07 182738.07))
>
> POLYGON ((540435.43 182745.85, 540438.43 182736.57, 540438.36 182736.55,
> 540433.78 182735.07, 540430.78 182744.35, 540435.43 182745.85))
>
> POLYGON ((540492.25 182733.65, 540490.95 182737.25, 540486.8 182736.45,
> 540485.1 182738, 540492.55 182746.6, 540495.8 182743.75, 540495 182742.85,
> 540496.1 182739.7, 540497.95 182740.35, 540499.45 182736.05, 540492.25
> 182733.65))
>
> POLYGON ((540478.8 182748, 540475.2 182749.5, 540473.05 182746.25, 540468.3
> 182745.7, 540468.2 182746, 540465.85 182745.9, 540465.65 182749.45,
> 540462.95 182749.25, 540462.8 182752.65, 540464.25 182752.75, 540464.05
> 182755.85, 540467.65 182756.05, 540467.8 182752.7, 540469.7 182752.85,
> 540469.2 182757.05, 540472.3 182757.4, 540473.35 182757.55, 540473.5
> 182756.4, 540476.65 182755.05, 540477.45 182756.85, 540481.65 182755.05,
> 540478.8 182748))
>
> POLYGON ((540436.7 182709.2, 540436.25 182710.85, 540435.6 182710.7,
> 540434.1 182716.2, 540455.2 182722, 540457.9 182712.2, 540461.05 182700.85,
> 540450.1 182697.85, 540448.7 182703, 540443.6 182701.55, 540441.2 182710.4,
> 540436.7 182709.2))
>
> POLYGON ((540482.7 182740.65, 540482.5 182740.5, 540481.15 182742.25,
> 540482.3 182746.5, 540478.8 182748, 540481.65 182755.05, 540485.75
> 182753.25, 540484.95 182751.35, 540488.1 182750.05, 540488.95 182750.75,
> 540491.4 182747.55, 540491.6 182747.25, 540482.7 182740.65))
>
> POLYGON ((540482.05 182804.5, 540481.35 182808.15, 540483.4 182808.7,
> 540498.25 182812.9, 540499.1 182808.9, 540485.4 182806.2, 540485.4
> 182805.2, 540484.1 182804.9, 540482.05 182804.5))
>
> POLYGON ((540500 182693.55, 540501.9 182693.1, 540503 182697.8, 540508.4
> 182696.55, 540505.1 182682.4, 540500 182683.55, 540497.2 182684.2,
> 540498.35 182689.25, 540497 182689.6, 540498 182694, 540500 182693.55))
>
> POLYGON ((540503.7 182699.05, 540500 182698.55, 540485.3 182696.55,
> 540483.15 182712.5, 540489.45 182713.35, 540491.05 182714.65, 540500
> 182715.95, 540509.5 182717.25, 540510.05 182711.65, 540511.3 182700.05,
> 540503.7 182699.05))
>
> POLYGON ((540505.3 182768.3, 540500 182767.4, 540495.7 182766.6, 540495.35
> 182768.85, 540493.3 182768.55, 540492.9 182771.1, 540500 182772.45,
> 540504.65 182773.35, 540505.3 182768.3))
>
> POLYGON ((540495.7 182766.6, 540500 182767.4, 540505.3 182768.3, 540505.95
> 182763.25, 540500 182762.15, 540498.8 182761.9, 540498.5 182764.2, 540495.6
> 182763.75, 540495.55 182764.2, 540493 182763.85, 540492.7 182766.05,
> 540495.7 182766.6))
>
> POLYGON ((540504.05 182777.65, 540500 182776.85, 540492.3 182775.4,
> 540491.95 182777.95, 540494 182778.2, 540493.8 182780.25, 540500 182781.5,
> 540503.45 182782.25, 540504.05 182777.65))
>
> POLYGON ((540504.65 182773.35, 540500 182772.45, 540492.9 182771.1,
> 540489.4 182770.5, 540483.5 182769.6, 540483.5 182769.65, 540483.25
> 182773.95, 540492.3 182775.4, 540500 182776.85, 540504.05 182777.65,
> 540504.65 182773.35))
>
> POLYGON ((540503.45 182782.25, 540500 182781.5, 540493.8 182780.25,
> 540491.65 182780.05, 540491.25 182782.65, 540493.3 182782.95, 540493.05
> 182785, 540500 182786.15, 540502.8 182786.6, 540503.45 182782.25))
>
> POLYGON ((540502.8 182786.6, 540500 182786.15, 540493.05 182785, 540488.3
> 182784.2, 540488.05 182785.65, 540489.15 182785.85, 540488.55 182789.1,
> 540489.7 182789.25, 540492.5 182789.6, 540500 182790.9, 540502.1 182791.35,
> 540502.8 182786.6))
>
> POLYGON ((540500.7 182800.35, 540500 182800.15, 540491.15 182798.6,
> 540488.4 182798.1, 540486.25 182797.85, 540483.85 182797.5, 540483.1
> 182801.75, 540488.2 182802.65, 540490.4 182803.1, 540492.75 182803.55,
> 540500 182804.95, 540500.7 182800.35))
>
> POLYGON ((540405.08 182772.25, 540394.81 182769.75, 540391.27 182784.27,
> 540413.69 182789.72, 540414.07 182788.17, 540417.22 182775.21, 540406.82
> 182772.67, 540405.08 182772.25))
>
> POLYGON ((540420.29 182791.33, 540442.81 182796.8, 540446.35 182782.29,
> 540435.98 182779.77, 540434.23 182779.34, 540423.83 182776.81, 540420.67
> 182789.78, 540420.29 182791.33))
>
> POLYGON ((540499.1 182808.9, 540500 182804.95, 540492.75 182803.55,
> 540492.55 182804.95, 540484.3 182803.6, 540484.1 182804.9, 540485.4
> 182805.2, 540485.4 182806.2, 540499.1 182808.9))
>
> Brian.
>
> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 7:04 PM, Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <
> [email protected]
> > wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > Is method of applying constraints (setting tolerance) similar in
> > ConformingDelaunayTriangulator Class to DelaunayTriangulationBuilder
> class?
> >
> > Brian.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:57 PM, Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> Yes, changing the tolerance affects the topology seriously. I tested
> this
> >> class with different data sets. What is weird is for some data sets, it
> >> works for a very small tolerance and for some not. Any alternative for
> this?
> >>
> >> Cheers, Brian.
> >>
> >> On Tue, Dec 3, 2013 at 12:21 AM, <
> >> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Send Jts-topo-suite-user mailing list submissions to
> >>> [email protected]
> >>>
> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> >>>
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jts-topo-suite-user
> >>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> >>> [email protected]
> >>>
> >>> You can reach the person managing the list at
> >>> [email protected]
> >>>
> >>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> >>> than "Re: Contents of Jts-topo-suite-user digest..."
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Today's Topics:
> >>>
> >>> 1. Polygon difference (Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe)
> >>> 2. Re: Polygon difference (Martin Davis)
> >>> 3. extract inserted envelopes from strtree (andrea antonello)
> >>> 4. Fwd: Polygon offset (Martin Davis)
> >>> 5. DelaunayTriangulationBuilder snapping tolerance
> >>> (Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe)
> >>> 6. Point to polygon distance in specified directions
> >>> (Michael Bedward)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Message: 1
> >>> Date: Sat, 30 Nov 2013 13:41:50 +0000
> >>> From: Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <[email protected]>
> >>> Subject: [Jts-topo-suite-user] Polygon difference
> >>> To: [email protected]
> >>> Message-ID:
> >>> <
> >>> caema-4gameevhzub-vmtdbnxiaqhrpzqb5quf08tdq9gt1u...@mail.gmail.com>
> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >>>
> >>> I have a small rectangles inside a bigger one with one side almost
> >>> touching
> >>> that of bigger rectangle. I need to get the difference which should be
> >>> another rectangle wiith JTS difference() method. Once obtained the
> >>> difference, output is not exactly a rectangle because
> >>> vertices of the touching edge of smaller rectangle do not exist on the
> >>> larger rectangle. Is there any possibility to clean the geometries so
> >>> that
> >>> the two touching lines will collapse and
> >>> create new segments along that line with correct noding. I tried using
> >>> GeometrySnapper class with computeOverlaySnapTolerance() method. But
> it
> >>> did not work. Is there any other method to deal with this in JTS?
> >>>
> >>> Cheers, Brian
> >>> -------------- next part --------------
> >>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Message: 2
> >>> Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2013 07:11:04 -0800
> >>> From: Martin Davis <[email protected]>
> >>> Subject: Re: [Jts-topo-suite-user] Polygon difference
> >>> Cc: "[email protected]"
> >>> <[email protected]>
> >>> Message-ID:
> >>> <
> >>> cak2ens1vj8knq2txwbg+-no-0exrvzurbbeotrr0bqedez2...@mail.gmail.com>
> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >>>
> >>> Would be helpful to see the WKT for this case and perhaps the expected
> >>> output.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sat, Nov 30, 2013 at 5:41 AM, Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <
> >>> [email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > I have a small rectangles inside a bigger one with one side almost
> >>> > touching that of bigger rectangle. I need to get the difference which
> >>> > should be another rectangle wiith JTS difference() method. Once
> >>> obtained
> >>> > the difference, output is not exactly a rectangle because
> >>> > vertices of the touching edge of smaller rectangle do not exist on
> the
> >>> > larger rectangle. Is there any possibility to clean the geometries so
> >>> that
> >>> > the two touching lines will collapse and
> >>> > create new segments along that line with correct noding. I tried
> using
> >>> > GeometrySnapper class with computeOverlaySnapTolerance() method. But
> >>> it
> >>> > did not work. Is there any other method to deal with this in JTS?
> >>> >
> >>> > Cheers, Brian
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> > Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most
> IT
> >>> > organizations don't have a clear picture of how application
> performance
> >>> > affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into
> >>> your
> >>> > Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of
> >>> AppDynamics
> >>> > Pro!
> >>> >
> >>>
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> >>> > _______________________________________________
> >>> > Jts-topo-suite-user mailing list
> >>> > [email protected]
> >>> > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jts-topo-suite-user
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> -------------- next part --------------
> >>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Message: 3
> >>> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 14:59:12 +0100
> >>> From: andrea antonello <[email protected]>
> >>> Subject: [Jts-topo-suite-user] extract inserted envelopes from strtree
> >>> To: "[email protected]"
> >>> <[email protected]>
> >>> Message-ID:
> >>> <
> >>> cacck5jpeq5najqu97b09vlpxjg8toaa2pn+wcrgpepo95tg...@mail.gmail.com>
> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >>>
> >>> Hello,
> >>> I am trying to understand if there is a way to get the list of
> envelopes
> >>> that were used to insert items in a STRtree, but while I see a way to
> get
> >>> the itemstree I can't find one to get the itemBoundables list.
> >>>
> >>> Any idea?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Andrea
> >>> -------------- next part --------------
> >>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Message: 4
> >>> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 11:29:01 -0800
> >>> From: Martin Davis <[email protected]>
> >>> Subject: [Jts-topo-suite-user] Fwd: Polygon offset
> >>> To: "[email protected]"
> >>> <[email protected]>
> >>> Message-ID:
> >>> <CAK2ens0maXAt2huOznTNKvZkdqGu81cR=
> >>> [email protected]>
> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >>>
> >>> Brian, please send these questions to the JTS list so all can share.
> >>>
> >>> Yes, setQuadrantSegments is irrelevant if JOIN_MITRE is used.
> >>>
> >>> For an explanation of mitre limit see the Javadoc:
> >>>
> >>>
> http://tsusiatsoftware.net/jts/javadoc/com/vividsolutions/jts/operation/buffer/BufferParameters.html#setMitreLimit(double)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> > wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > Hi Martin,
> >>> >
> >>> > In the code i sent for setting parameters in buffering, i suppose
> >>> BufP.setQuadrantSegments(1)
> >>> > does not make any sense for Join_Meter style . What is meant by
> >>> setting a
> >>> > value to Default_Meter_Limit? Will it be more the value, more
> pointing
> >>> at
> >>> > corners??
> >>> >
> >>> > Cheers, Brian
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>> > On Thu, Nov 28, 2013 at 10:10 PM, Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <
> >>> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >>> >
> >>> >> Here is the method and the polygon i used with a +- 20 m distance.
> >>> >>
> >>> >> public static Geometry bufferPlusMinus (Geometry g, double dst1,
> >>> double
> >>> >> dst2)
> >>> >> {
> >>> >> BufferParameters BufP = new BufferParameters();
> >>> >> BufP.setEndCapStyle(3);
> >>> >> BufP.setJoinStyle(2);
> >>> >> BufP.setQuadrantSegments(1);
> >>> >> BufferBuilder Buffb = new BufferBuilder(BufP);
> >>> >> Geometry BuffG = Buffb.buffer(g, dst1);
> >>> >> Geometry fp = Buffb.buffer(BuffG, dst2);
> >>> >> return fp;
> >>> >> }
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >> POLYGON ((852.0508353104653 79.66036245972747, 785.3441701464214
> >>> >> -13.474425749638762, 721.4579830330817 -14.427950930434887,
> >>> >> 718.7632379569188 10.092344825531626, 718.535947988926
> >>> 20.8108253483052,
> >>> >> 739.5010955848701 12.351204388538228, 734.8751753004104
> >>> 4.721699044367739,
> >>> >> 776.4081693414112 6.153871252678144, 785.3441701464214
> >>> 12.270754131856343,
> >>> >> 831.0856877145211 70.0973126791213, 814.1664457949871
> >>> 71.5685511069069,
> >>> >> 803.8677768004884 81.49941049445935, 852.0508353104653
> >>> 79.66036245972747))
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> >>
> >>> -------------- next part --------------
> >>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Message: 5
> >>> Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 22:50:56 +0000
> >>> From: Brian Sanjeewa Rupasinghe <[email protected]>
> >>> Subject: [Jts-topo-suite-user] DelaunayTriangulationBuilder snapping
> >>> tolerance
> >>> To: [email protected]
> >>> Message-ID:
> >>> <
> >>> caema-4irrhwbrq9zcjufabe_owixi_sbkc7s4q+f1bi+bsv...@mail.gmail.com>
> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
> >>>
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> I use DelaunayTriangulationBuilder class to run triangulation between
> >>> polygons and lines (about 2500 geometries) with lines used as
> constraint
> >>> edges. Initially i set the tolerance to a smaller value (0.001). For
> this
> >>> value, triangulation does not run. However, when i increased it to 3.1,
> >>> the
> >>> triangulation executed. This tolerance is for snapping according to JTS
> >>> API. I need to know what happens when the tolerance is increased. Will
> it
> >>> affect triangulation result? According to API, i suppose it is not, but
> >>> to
> >>> deal with robustness issues. Further clarification is appreciated.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers, Brian
> >>> -------------- next part --------------
> >>> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> Message: 6
> >>> Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 11:21:19 +1100
> >>> From: Michael Bedward <[email protected]>
> >>> Subject: [Jts-topo-suite-user] Point to polygon distance in specified
> >>> directions
> >>> To: "[email protected]"
> >>> <[email protected]>
> >>> Cc: Trent Penman <[email protected]>
> >>> Message-ID:
> >>> <
> >>> cacjvtdou4jseh+sxl-otmrdybbku_eb-8w-cv7a+9e84aft...@mail.gmail.com>
> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> >>>
> >>> Hi Martin,
> >>>
> >>> The following is a general algorithm query rather than a specific JTS
> >>> question - hope that's ok.
> >>>
> >>> I have a set of polygons which represent urban areas within a
> >>> fire-prone landscape. There are about 5000 polygons varying widely in
> >>> area, spatial extent, number of vertices and boundary complexity.
> >>>
> >>> I have the task of creating a regular grid of sample points within the
> >>> surrounding landscape and, for each point, determining the distance to
> >>> the nearest polygon within each of eight compass segments (ie. N to
> >>> NE, NE to E...). The results only need to be expressed as categorized
> >>> values based on a small number of distance cut-points.
> >>>
> >>> I've been trying to nut out something other than a brute force
> >>> approach to this without much success so far. One of the possibly less
> >>> brutish approaches I've thought of involves the following:
> >>>
> >>> 1. Split up the urban polygons by intersecting them with a regular
> >>> lattice, create PreparedGeometry objects for the resulting parts and
> >>> put them into an STRtree.
> >>>
> >>> 2. Construct a sampling template made up of polygons representing the
> >>> compass segments, each split according to the distance cut-points
> >>> (looking a bit like a dart board), possibly using a custom
> >>> CoordinateSequence to have vertex coordinates calculated on the fly
> >>> based on the centre coordinate.
> >>>
> >>> 3. For each sample point location:
> >>> For each compass segment:
> >>> For inner to outer segment part:
> >>> Query the spatial index with the segment part envelope
> >>> and, if any urban polygons are returned, test for
> >>> intersection.
> >>>
> >>> I'm sure there must be a better way. Any suggestions or comments will
> >>> be gratefully accepted.
> >>>
> >>> Michael
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> Rapidly troubleshoot problems before they affect your business. Most IT
> >>> organizations don't have a clear picture of how application performance
> >>> affects their revenue. With AppDynamics, you get 100% visibility into
> >>> your
> >>> Java,.NET, & PHP application. Start your 15-day FREE TRIAL of
> >>> AppDynamics Pro!
> >>>
> >>>
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=84349351&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
> >>>
> >>> ------------------------------
> >>>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Jts-topo-suite-user mailing list
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jts-topo-suite-user
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> End of Jts-topo-suite-user Digest, Vol 48, Issue 1
> >>> **************************************************
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>
> ------------------------------
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK
> Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base.
> Download it for free now!
>
> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Jts-topo-suite-user mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jts-topo-suite-user
>
>
> End of Jts-topo-suite-user Digest, Vol 48, Issue 6
> **************************************************
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sponsored by Intel(R) XDK
Develop, test and display web and hybrid apps with a single code base.
Download it for free now!
http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=111408631&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk
_______________________________________________
Jts-topo-suite-user mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jts-topo-suite-user
