Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-09 Thread Szehon Ho 
+1 (binding)

Thanks
Szehon

On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 10:41 AM huaxin gao  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 9:29 AM Denny Lee  wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 8:37 AM Daniel Weeks  wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:24 AM Russell Spitzer <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
 +1 (bind)

 On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:32 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <
 [email protected]> wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 4:14 AM Gang Wu  wrote:
>
>> The clarification is simple and clear from the writer's perspective.
>>
>> CMIW, the implication is that reader should drop bbox with any NaN
>> value regardless of the coordinate axis (in case of a writer bug).
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:21 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
>>> Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:
>>>
 +1 (non-binding)

 Thanks for putting this together!

 Jia Yu

 On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho 
 wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> As discussed briefly in
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq,
> there is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to 
> get in
> for finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN
> coordinate values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate 
> values in a
> geo object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not 
> skipped.
>
> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.
> The PR is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>
> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>
> Thanks,
> Szehon
>

>>>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-09 Thread Szehon Ho 
The vote passes with 7 binding +1's and 4 non-binding +1's.

Thanks everyone for voting!
Szehon

On Fri, May 9, 2025 at 3:26 PM Szehon Ho  wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks
> Szehon
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 10:41 AM huaxin gao  wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 9:29 AM Denny Lee  wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 8:37 AM Daniel Weeks  wrote:
>>>
 +1 (binding)

 On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:24 AM Russell Spitzer <
 [email protected]> wrote:

> +1 (bind)
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:32 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 4:14 AM Gang Wu  wrote:
>>
>>> The clarification is simple and clear from the writer's perspective.
>>>
>>> CMIW, the implication is that reader should drop bbox with any NaN
>>> value regardless of the coordinate axis (in case of a writer bug).
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:21 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng
>>>  wrote:
>>>
 +1 (non-binding)

 On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:

 +1 (binding)

 Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this
 done!

 On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks for putting this together!
>
> Jia Yu
>
> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> As discussed briefly in
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq,
>> there is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to 
>> get in
>> for finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN
>> coordinate values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate 
>> values in a
>> geo object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not 
>> skipped.
>>
>> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.
>> The PR is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>>
>> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
>> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>>
>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Szehon
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-07 Thread huaxin gao 
+1 (non-binding)

On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 9:29 AM Denny Lee  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 8:37 AM Daniel Weeks  wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:24 AM Russell Spitzer 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (bind)
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:32 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
 +1 (binding)

 On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 4:14 AM Gang Wu  wrote:

> The clarification is simple and clear from the writer's perspective.
>
> CMIW, the implication is that reader should drop bbox with any NaN
> value regardless of the coordinate axis (in case of a writer bug).
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:21 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng
>  wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!
>>
>> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> Thanks for putting this together!
>>>
>>> Jia Yu
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi everyone,

 As discussed briefly in
 https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq,
 there is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get 
 in
 for finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN
 coordinate values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values 
 in a
 geo object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not 
 skipped.

 I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The
 PR is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.

 This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
 https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494

 This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.

 [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
 [ ] +0
 [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns

 Thanks,
 Szehon

>>>
>>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-07 Thread Denny Lee 
+1 (non-binding)

On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 8:37 AM Daniel Weeks  wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:24 AM Russell Spitzer 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 (bind)
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:32 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <
>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 4:14 AM Gang Wu  wrote:
>>>
 The clarification is simple and clear from the writer's perspective.

 CMIW, the implication is that reader should drop bbox with any NaN
 value regardless of the coordinate axis (in case of a writer bug).

 On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:21 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng
  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!
>
> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> Thanks for putting this together!
>>
>> Jia Yu
>>
>> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> As discussed briefly in
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq,
>>> there is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get 
>>> in
>>> for finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN
>>> coordinate values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values 
>>> in a
>>> geo object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not 
>>> skipped.
>>>
>>> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The
>>> PR is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>>>
>>> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
>>> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>>>
>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Szehon
>>>
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-07 Thread Daniel Weeks 
+1 (binding)

On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:24 AM Russell Spitzer 
wrote:

> +1 (bind)
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:32 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 4:14 AM Gang Wu  wrote:
>>
>>> The clarification is simple and clear from the writer's perspective.
>>>
>>> CMIW, the implication is that reader should drop bbox with any NaN value
>>> regardless of the coordinate axis (in case of a writer bug).
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:21 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng
>>>  wrote:
>>>
 +1 (non-binding)

 On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:

 +1 (binding)

 Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!

 On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks for putting this together!
>
> Jia Yu
>
> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> As discussed briefly in
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq,
>> there is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get in
>> for finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN
>> coordinate values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values 
>> in a
>> geo object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not skipped.
>>
>> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The
>> PR is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>>
>> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
>> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>>
>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Szehon
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-07 Thread Fokko Driesprong 
+1 (b)

Op wo 7 mei 2025 om 16:24 schreef Russell Spitzer :

> +1 (bind)
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:32 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 4:14 AM Gang Wu  wrote:
>>
>>> The clarification is simple and clear from the writer's perspective.
>>>
>>> CMIW, the implication is that reader should drop bbox with any NaN value
>>> regardless of the coordinate axis (in case of a writer bug).
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:21 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng
>>>  wrote:
>>>
 +1 (non-binding)

 On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:

 +1 (binding)

 Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!

 On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks for putting this together!
>
> Jia Yu
>
> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> As discussed briefly in
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq,
>> there is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get in
>> for finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN
>> coordinate values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values 
>> in a
>> geo object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not skipped.
>>
>> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The
>> PR is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>>
>> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
>> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>>
>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Szehon
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-07 Thread Russell Spitzer 
+1 (bind)

On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 7:32 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner 
wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 4:14 AM Gang Wu  wrote:
>
>> The clarification is simple and clear from the writer's perspective.
>>
>> CMIW, the implication is that reader should drop bbox with any NaN value
>> regardless of the coordinate axis (in case of a writer bug).
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:21 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
>>> Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:
>>>
 +1 (non-binding)

 Thanks for putting this together!

 Jia Yu

 On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho 
 wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> As discussed briefly in
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq,
> there is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get in
> for finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN
> coordinate values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values in 
> a
> geo object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not skipped.
>
> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The PR
> is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>
> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>
> Thanks,
> Szehon
>

>>>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-07 Thread Amogh Jahagirdar 
+1 (binding)

On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:32 AM Eduard Tudenhöfner 
wrote:

> +1 (binding)
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 4:14 AM Gang Wu  wrote:
>
>> The clarification is simple and clear from the writer's perspective.
>>
>> CMIW, the implication is that reader should drop bbox with any NaN value
>> regardless of the coordinate axis (in case of a writer bug).
>>
>> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:21 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng
>>  wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:
>>>
>>> +1 (binding)
>>>
>>> Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:
>>>
 +1 (non-binding)

 Thanks for putting this together!

 Jia Yu

 On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho 
 wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> As discussed briefly in
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq,
> there is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get in
> for finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN
> coordinate values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values in 
> a
> geo object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not skipped.
>
> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The PR
> is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>
> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>
> Thanks,
> Szehon
>

>>>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-07 Thread Eduard Tudenhöfner 
+1 (binding)

On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 4:14 AM Gang Wu  wrote:

> The clarification is simple and clear from the writer's perspective.
>
> CMIW, the implication is that reader should drop bbox with any NaN value
> regardless of the coordinate axis (in case of a writer bug).
>
> On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:21 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng 
> wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:
>>
>> +1 (binding)
>>
>> Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!
>>
>> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (non-binding)
>>>
>>> Thanks for putting this together!
>>>
>>> Jia Yu
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi everyone,

 As discussed briefly in
 https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq,
 there is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get in
 for finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN
 coordinate values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values in a
 geo object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not skipped.

 I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The PR
 is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.

 This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
 https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494

 This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.

 [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
 [ ] +0
 [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns

 Thanks,
 Szehon

>>>
>>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-06 Thread Gang Wu 
The clarification is simple and clear from the writer's perspective.

CMIW, the implication is that reader should drop bbox with any NaN value
regardless of the coordinate axis (in case of a writer bug).

On Wed, May 7, 2025 at 6:21 AM Huang-Hsiang Cheng 
wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:
>
> +1 (binding)
>
> Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!
>
> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:
>
>> +1 (non-binding)
>>
>> Thanks for putting this together!
>>
>> Jia Yu
>>
>> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> As discussed briefly in
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq, there
>>> is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get in for
>>> finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN coordinate
>>> values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values in a geo
>>> object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not skipped.
>>>
>>> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The PR
>>> is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>>>
>>> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
>>> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>>>
>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Szehon
>>>
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-06 Thread Huang-Hsiang Cheng 
+1 (non-binding)

> On May 6, 2025, at 2:53 PM, Ryan Blue  wrote:
> 
> +1 (binding)
> 
> Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!
> 
> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  > wrote:
>> +1 (non-binding)
>> 
>> Thanks for putting this together!
>> 
>> Jia Yu
>> 
>> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho > > wrote:
>>> Hi everyone,
>>> 
>>> As discussed briefly in 
>>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq, there is 
>>> a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get in for 
>>> finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN coordinate 
>>> values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values in a geo 
>>> object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not skipped.
>>> 
>>> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The PR is:  
>>> https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>>> 
>>> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:  
>>> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>>> 
>>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>> 
>>> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
>>> [ ] +0
>>> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Szehon

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-06 Thread Ryan Blue 
+1 (binding)

Thanks to Jia and Szehon for the quick turn-around getting this done!

On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:37 PM Jia Yu  wrote:

> +1 (non-binding)
>
> Thanks for putting this together!
>
> Jia Yu
>
> On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho  wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> As discussed briefly in
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq, there
>> is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get in for
>> finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN coordinate
>> values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values in a geo
>> object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not skipped.
>>
>> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The PR
>> is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>>
>> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
>> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>>
>> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
>> [ ] +0
>> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Szehon
>>
>

Re: [VOTE] Minor clarification for Geo Spec

2025-05-06 Thread Jia Yu 
+1 (non-binding)

Thanks for putting this together!

Jia Yu

On Tue, May 6, 2025 at 2:09 PM Szehon Ho  wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> As discussed briefly in
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/ncj0xjh2ct5xvovn4tzc45lkm1wbmorq, there
> is a minor clarification for geo type bounds that we want to get in for
> finalizing V3 spec.  We want to clarify the behavior of null/NaN coordinate
> values in geo objects.  There can be many coordinate values in a geo
> object, only the null/NaN ones are skipped, the rest are not skipped.
>
> I would like to raise a vote for this minor change to V3 spec.  The PR
> is:  https://github.com/apache/iceberg/pull/12956.
>
> This is going on in parallel with a parquet-format pr:
> https://github.com/apache/parquet-format/pull/494
>
> This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 Add these simplifications to the V3 Geo spec
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1 I have questions and/or concerns
>
> Thanks,
> Szehon
>