I agree that starting at 1 is more consistent than starting at 0, because 
OTB is based on GDAL and GDAL starts at 1 and some applications already 
start at 1 (BandMath) . What I meant is that IF you announce a Python-like 
syntax, THEN it must be consitent with Python



Le lundi 27 février 2017 11:33:38 UTC+1, Poughon Victor a écrit :
>
> My two cents on this:
>
> *Start at 0 or 1:*
> While there are strong arguments to start indexing at zero (
> https://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD/transcriptions/EWD08xx/EWD831.html), 
> I vote for starting at 1 because:
> - OTB is used by non programmers
> - QGIS and GDAL are 1 based
> - Most sensors are 1 based (
> http://gis.stackexchange.com/questions/219886/is-it-convention-to-index-a-raster-band-from-1?atw=1
> )
>
> *End-point inclusion*
> I think I prefer the end point to be excluded because then:
> - A:B has B-A elements in it
> - It's possible to express the empty range (A:A) (perhaps that's not a 
> good thing?)
>
> just my 2 cents
>
> Victor Poughon
> ------------------------------
> *De :* [email protected] <javascript:> [[email protected] 
> <javascript:>] de la part de Guillaume Pasero [[email protected] 
> <javascript:>]
> *Envoyé :* lundi 27 février 2017 10:51
> *À :* [email protected] <javascript:>
> *Objet :* Re: [otb-users] Re: Extended filename for band selection
>
> Dear Julien,
>
> Thanks for your feedback. 
> It is true that current syntax is somewhere in-between different standards.
> About the use of "band[]" as general syntax, it would not be consistent 
> with other extended filenames : we always use "keyword=value". So, it 
> should be something like "band=[]".
>
> Regards,
> Guillaume
>
> On 02/25/2017 10:41 AM, Julien Radoux wrote:
>
> Dear Guillaume,
>
> This would be usefull, thanks. I don't care about band or bands. for the 
> syntax, Python-like is nice, but then it is confusing not to start with 
> band 0 for the first band. maybe using [] would also make things clear. To 
> be more "pythonic", I would rather use bands[] with the python indices but 
> this is probably more difficult to parse. Also, in python, [2:4] would mean 
> bands with index 2 and 3 (not the 4), so this is not consistent. 
>
> To conclude, Python-like is fine, but it would be very confusing if there 
> are too many differences. In your example, it makes me think of Matlab 
> indexing, which is fine but should be stated as such in the help (then use 
> "end" instead of -1 for the last band)
>
> For the last question, I do have some home made scripts that could benefit 
> from band selection in the extended filename. One application with a 
> standard filter would be the use of Meanshift segmentation where you only 
> want the smoothed mean value for one of the output bands (e.g. a NDVI band) 
> but you want to use more than one band as input for the mean shift 
> segmentation. 
>
>
>
> Le vendredi 24 février 2017 17:25:37 UTC+1, Guillaume Pasero a écrit : 
>>
>> Dear users,
>>
>> A new feature is in development to provide an extended filename for input 
>> band selection (see extended_band 
>> <https://git.orfeo-toolbox.org/otb.git/shortlog/refs/heads/extended_band>). 
>> A simple use-case is when you have a multi-channel image, and you want to 
>> process only the second band of this image using an OTB Application. With 
>> this feature you could do it like this :
>>
>> otbcli_MyApplication -in  *"my_image.tif?band=2"*  -out output.tif
>>
>> The current syntax (inspired by Python syntax) has already been 
>> implemented :
>>
>>    - *band=r1,r2,...,rn*     where each '*ri*' is a generic range 
>>    - A generic range can be : 
>>       - A single band index : '1' is the first band, for negative 
>>       numbers the numbering is backward ( '*-1*' is the last band)
>>       - A range of bands, using the character ':' between optional start 
>>       and end indexes : 
>>          - '*3:*' means the 3rd band until the last one 
>>          - '*:-2*' means the first band until the second to last 
>>          - '*2:4*' means bands 2, 3 and 4
>>          
>>
>> We would like to have your feedback on several points :
>>
>>    - We will likely change the keyword "*band*" to plural "*bands*", no 
>>    objection ? 
>>    - Is the syntax clear / convenient / confusing ? 
>>    - There can be a debate between 0-based and 1-based indexing for band 
>>    numbers. At the moment, it is not uniform in OTB but we think that 
>> 1-based 
>>    indexing should be the convention exposed to the user. 
>>    - It is also possible to implement it on image writers, would it help 
>>    ? What would be your use-cases ?
>>    
>> Thanks for your feedback,
>>
>> Guillaume
>> -- 
>> <http://www.c-s.fr> *Guillaume PASERO*
>> Responsable technique
>> *Business Unit ESPACE & GeoInformation - Département Payload Data & 
>> Applications*
>>
>> *CS Systèmes d'Information*
>> Parc de la Grande Plaine - 5, Rue Brindejonc des Moulinais - BP 15872
>> 31506 Toulouse Cedex 05 - FRANCE
>> +33 561 17 64 21 - [email protected] <http://UrlBlockedError.aspx> 
>>
> -- 
> -- 
> Check the OTB FAQ at
> http://www.orfeo-toolbox.org/FAQ.html
>  
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "otb-users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 
> <javascript:>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected] <javascript:>
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/otb-users?hl=en
> --- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "otb-users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>
>
> -- 
> <http://UrlBlockedError.aspx> *Guillaume PASERO*
> Responsable technique
> *Business Unit ESPACE & GeoInformation - Département Payload Data & 
> Applications*
>
> *CS Systèmes d'Information*
> Parc de la Grande Plaine - 5, Rue Brindejonc des Moulinais - BP 15872
> 31506 Toulouse Cedex 05 - FRANCE
> +33 561 17 64 21 - [email protected] <javascript:> 
>
> -- 
> -- 
> Check the OTB FAQ at
> http://www.orfeo-toolbox.org/FAQ.html
>  
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
> Groups "otb-users" group.
> To post to this group, send email to [email protected] 
> <javascript:>
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected] <javascript:>
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/otb-users?hl=en
> --- 
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
> "otb-users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an 
> email to [email protected] <javascript:>.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>

-- 
-- 
Check the OTB FAQ at
http://www.orfeo-toolbox.org/FAQ.html

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
Groups "otb-users" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/otb-users?hl=en
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"otb-users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to