Changes between Initial Version and Version 1 of Ticket #4749, comment 4


Ignore:
Timestamp:
Sep 9, 2020, 3:29:04 PM (4 years ago)
Author:
pramsey

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • Ticket #4749, comment 4

    initial v1  
    11I'm not sure I understand why even things like invalid multipolygons cannot be amenable to predicate evaluation?
    22
    3 A Intersects B... if any element A intersects any element of B, A intersects B
    4 A Contains B... if all elements of B are contained by at least one element of A, and are disjoint from all other elenents of A, then A contains B
    5 A Touches B... if all elements of A touch an element of B, and are disjoint from all other elements of B, then A touches B
     3* A Intersects B... if any element A intersects any element of B, A intersects B
     4* A Contains B... if all elements of B are contained by at least one element of A, and are disjoint from all other elenents of A, then A contains B
     5* A Touches B... if all elements of A touch an element of B, and are disjoint from all other elements of B, then A touches B
    66
    77I mean, Relate() is not possible, but it feels like the boolean predicates, which are made up of some "obvious" interactions and other "ok, I can kind of believe that" intersection (do we really believe "crosses" is well defined between two polygons?) do have plausible rules that can be at least made up for GCs.