I have two files of point locations: sites.gdb and sites.shp. I also have a
file with (I assume) the same data. Am I correct is assuming that the .gdb
file would be topographically preferred over the .shp file and the better
one to import?
Rich
What do you mean by better? Correct data? Easier to import?
If they contain the same data I think it does not matter which one you use. Specially because you are talking about point data. But, if there is a difference in the data, then you have another problem. Figuring out which one is correct
Cheers
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 1:13 PM Rich Shepard <rshepard@appl-ecosys.com> wrote:
I have two files of point locations: sites.gdb and sites.shp. I also have a
file with (I assume) the same data. Am I correct is assuming that the .gdb
file would be topographically preferred over the .shp file and the better
one to import?Rich
grass-user mailing list
grass-user@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020, Daniel Victoria wrote:
What do you mean by better? Correct data? Easier to import?
Daniel,
More complete topographic information. I recall learning a long time ago
that shapefiles are not as topographically complete as other formats such as
the older (and excellent) .e00 files. Do gdb files have any additional
information compared with shp files? Are they preferred for some reason?
Thanks,
Rich
Rich,
This is an old PDF (2009) but it lists some advantages of file geodatabase.
https://www.esri.com/news/arcuser/0309/files/9reasons.pdf
Another thing worth mentioning is that in order to do topological analysis in ESRIs world, you would need to use geodatabases since shapefiles does not carry topology information.
But you mentioned that you are dealing with point data. I never heard of using topology with point data. So you are probably fine importing from either one (shape or gdb)
Also, don’t know it the topology part of a GDB file is recognized by OGR/grass. I believe Grass generates the topology once it’s imports vector data, be it from shapefile or GDB.
Now, if the attribute table has long column names, accents and things like that, it’s probably correct in the GDB. Remember that shapefiles use DBF for attribute table…
Disclaimer: I haven´t used an ESRI product in a long time. So the information in here could be outdated
Cheers
Daniel
On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 1:56 PM Rich Shepard <rshepard@appl-ecosys.com> wrote:
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020, Daniel Victoria wrote:
What do you mean by better? Correct data? Easier to import?
Daniel,
More complete topographic information. I recall learning a long time ago
that shapefiles are not as topographically complete as other formats such as
the older (and excellent) .e00 files. Do gdb files have any additional
information compared with shp files? Are they preferred for some reason?Thanks,
Rich
grass-user mailing list
grass-user@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/grass-user
On Tue, 11 Feb 2020, Daniel Victoria wrote:
This is an old PDF (2009) but it lists some advantages of file geodatabase.
https://www.esri.com/news/arcuser/0309/files/9reasons.pdf
Daniel,
Thanks for the URI.
Another thing worth mentioning is that in order to do topological analysis
in ESRIs world, you would need to use geodatabases since shapefiles does
not carry topology information.
That's what I thought. Of course I don't work in ESRI-world; not since I was
a PC-ARC/Info beta tester in 1987.
But you mentioned that you are dealing with point data. I never heard of
using topology with point data. So you are probably fine importing from
either one (shape or gdb) Also, don't know it the topology part of a GDB
file is recognized by OGR/grass. I believe Grass generates the topology
once it's imports vector data, be it from shapefile or GDB.
I believe you're correct in this. When I collect a data set I try to include
all information as I don't know what would be needed in the future.
Now, if the attribute table has long column names, accents and things like
that, it's probably correct in the GDB. Remember that shapefiles use DBF
for attribute table...
Nah. Not applicable.
Disclaimer: I haven´t used an ESRI product in a long time. So the
information in here could be outdated
Yet it's perfectly good to answer my question.
Best regards,
Rich