On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 7:45 AM, Matthias Kuhn <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 6/27/17 7:19 AM, Paolo Cavallini wrote: > > > Hi Nyall, > > > > Il 27/06/2017 01:41, Nyall Dawson ha scritto: > > > >>> This discussion relates to the "Convex Hull" algorithm. I'd like to: > >>> > >>> 1. Drop the "Field (optional, only used if creating convex hulls by > >>> classes)" option and the accompanying method choice used to set the > >>> convex hull to 'create convex hulls based on field'. > > > > I understand the rationale behind this; I'm just a bit worried it will > > be more complicated and less understandable for users. > > Perhaps adding another module that does both commands (collect + convex > > hull) in one shot would be useful? > > All the best. > > Maybe there is the need to ship some often-used models by default then? > Thinking of code complexity and maintainability, it makes much sense to > modularize algorithm code as much as possible > I absolutely understand the reason from an engineering point. From the user point - and as someone answering a lot of user questions - it is predictable that end users will be confused. Idea: Have a warning if a user tries to run the new "convex hull" on a dataset with single part geometries? Best wishes, Anita
_______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list [email protected] List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
