The description for the “type” argument for r.to.vect calls it “Input feature type”, but actually it should be “Output feature type”.
Michael
C. Michael Barton
Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science
Arizona State University
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Michael Barton <Michael.Barton@asu.edu> wrote:
I just ran into this last night.
The description for the “type” argument for r.to.vect calls it “Input
feature type”, but actually it should be “Output feature type”.
I'm not sure. The raster input defines also the output to some extent.
In G6 it was simply called "Feature type", perhaps we should restore
that description?
In r.to.vect, this argument ONLY refers to the output vector feature. There are not any different feature types for the 2D raster maps that are input to this module. I assume that while the nature of the raster map affects the vector feature type to some extent, this argument can force it to output a particular feature type when there is the potential for multiple feature type output.
I suppose simply “feature type” is OK. But it is the output vector map that is being referred to in any case and “input” feature type is misleading IMHO.
Michael
____________________
C. Michael Barton
Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science
Arizona State University
On Dec 1, 2014, at 4:13 PM, Markus Neteler <neteler@osgeo.org> wrote:
On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Michael Barton <Michael.Barton@asu.edu> wrote:
I just ran into this last night.
The description for the “type” argument for r.to.vect calls it “Input
feature type”, but actually it should be “Output feature type”.
I'm not sure. The raster input defines also the output to some extent.
In G6 it was simply called "Feature type", perhaps we should restore
that description?
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Michael Barton <Michael.Barton@asu.edu>
wrote:
In r.to.vect, this argument ONLY refers to the output vector feature.
There are not any different feature types for the 2D raster maps that are
input to this module. I assume that while the nature of the raster map
affects the vector feature type to some extent, this argument can force it
to output a particular feature type when there is the potential for
multiple feature type output.
I suppose simply “feature type” is OK. But it is the output vector map
that is being referred to in any case and “input” feature type is
misleading IMHO.
Michael
____________________
C. Michael Barton
Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science
Arizona State University
On Dec 1, 2014, at 4:13 PM, Markus Neteler <neteler@osgeo.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Michael Barton <Michael.Barton@asu.edu>
wrote:
>> I just ran into this last night.
>>
>> The description for the “type” argument for r.to.vect calls it “Input
>> feature type”, but actually it should be “Output feature type”.
>
> I'm not sure. The raster input defines also the output to some extent.
> In G6 it was simply called "Feature type", perhaps we should restore
> that description?
>
> Markus
In r.to.vect, this argument ONLY refers to the output vector feature. There are not any different feature types for the 2D raster maps that are input to this module. I assume that while the nature of the raster map affects the vector feature type to some extent, this argument can force it to output a particular feature type when there is the potential for multiple feature type output.
I suppose simply “feature type” is OK. But it is the output vector map that is being referred to in any case and “input” feature type is misleading IMHO.
But the input is always a raster. So there is no reason for an option G_OPT_V_TYPE_INPUT
The output is always a vector, which CAN have different feature types, so there is a reason for G_OPT_V_TYPE_OUTPUT.
Michael
Anna
Michael
C. Michael Barton
Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science
Arizona State University
The description for the “type” argument for r.to.vect calls it “Input
feature type”, but actually it should be “Output feature type”.
I’m not sure. The raster input defines also the output to some extent.
In G6 it was simply called “Feature type”, perhaps we should restore
that description?
On Tue, Dec 2, 2014 at 12:01 AM, Michael Barton <Michael.Barton@asu.edu>
wrote:
On Dec 1, 2014, at 9:31 PM, Anna Petrášová <kratochanna@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 6:21 PM, Michael Barton <Michael.Barton@asu.edu>
wrote:
In r.to.vect, this argument ONLY refers to the output vector feature.
There are not any different feature types for the 2D raster maps that are
input to this module. I assume that while the nature of the raster map
affects the vector feature type to some extent, this argument can force it
to output a particular feature type when there is the potential for
multiple feature type output.
I suppose simply “feature type” is OK. But it is the output vector map
that is being referred to in any case and “input” feature type is
misleading IMHO.
But the input is always a raster. So there is no reason for an option
G_OPT_V_TYPE_INPUT
The output is always a vector, which CAN have different feature types,
so there is a reason for G_OPT_V_TYPE_OUTPUT.
I was talking about introducing new standard options G_OPT_V_TYPE_INPUT,
G_OPT_V_TYPE_OUTPUT which would differ only in description (Input feature
type/Output feature type). r.to.vect would then use G_OPT_V_TYPE_OUTPUT,
v.to.rast would use G_OPT_V_TYPE_INPUT. Or we just stay with G_OPT_V_TYPE
and redefine description.
Michael
Anna
Michael
____________________
C. Michael Barton
Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science
Arizona State University
On Dec 1, 2014, at 4:13 PM, Markus Neteler <neteler@osgeo.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 29, 2014 at 6:20 PM, Michael Barton <Michael.Barton@asu.edu>
wrote:
>> I just ran into this last night.
>>
>> The description for the “type” argument for r.to.vect calls it “Input
>> feature type”, but actually it should be “Output feature type”.
>
> I'm not sure. The raster input defines also the output to some extent.
> In G6 it was simply called "Feature type", perhaps we should restore
> that description?
>
> Markus
C. Michael Barton
Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ 85287-2402
USA
In r.to.vect, this argument ONLY refers to the output vector feature. There are not any different feature types for the 2D raster maps that are input to this module. I assume that while the nature of the raster map affects the vector feature type to some extent, this argument can force it to output a particular feature type when there is the potential for multiple feature type output.
I suppose simply “feature type” is OK. But it is the output vector map that is being referred to in any case and “input” feature type is misleading IMHO.
But the input is always a raster. So there is no reason for an option G_OPT_V_TYPE_INPUT
The output is always a vector, which CAN have different feature types, so there is a reason for G_OPT_V_TYPE_OUTPUT.
I was talking about introducing new standard options G_OPT_V_TYPE_INPUT, G_OPT_V_TYPE_OUTPUT which would differ only in description (Input feature type/Output feature type). r.to.vect would then use G_OPT_V_TYPE_OUTPUT, v.to.rast would use G_OPT_V_TYPE_INPUT. Or we just stay with G_OPT_V_TYPE and redefine description.
Yes. This makes sense.
Michael
Michael
Anna
Michael
C. Michael Barton
Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science
Arizona State University
The description for the “type” argument for r.to.vect calls it “Input
feature type”, but actually it should be “Output feature type”.
I’m not sure. The raster input defines also the output to some extent.
In G6 it was simply called “Feature type”, perhaps we should restore
that description?
For r.to.vect, there are no input vector features. The only input is a raster.
It is the output that produces vector features.
Michael
______________________________
C. Michael Barton
Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ 85287-2402
USA
I think there are quite a few modules that output vector files where the type might vary.
Michael
______________________________
C. Michael Barton
Director, Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity
Professor of Anthropology, School of Human Evolution & Social Change
Head, Graduate Faculty in Complex Adaptive Systems Science
Arizona State University
Tempe, AZ 85287-2402
USA