[geos-devel] [postgis-devel] Coverage Functions

[Paul Ramsey]

For context, the GEOS discussions were here.
https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geos-devel/2023-April/010887.html
P

On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 3:00 PM Paul Ramsey <pramsey at cleverelephant.ca> wrote:
>
>
>
> On Apr 28, 2023, at 2:57 PM, Martin Davis <mtnclimb at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Fri, Apr 28, 2023 at 7:18 AM Sandro Santilli <strk at kbt.io> wrote:
>>
>>
>> As mentioned in chat, I'm thinking having a GEOSCoverage
>> datatype would be advisible here, with one constructor
>> taking a vector of Geometry pointer for now but eventually
>> getting more constructors.
>
>
> Sandro, are you suggesting a GEOSCoverage type containing a *topological* structure, or one containing a set of Polygons/MultiPolygons?
>
> For a topological structure, that may be useful, but that is a fair bit of work and is NOT required by the recent coverage functions.  If and when this is done, I suggest it is called GEOSTopology to be totally clear.
>
> For a coverage type that simply contains a list of polygonal geometries, that is what I have called a Simple Features Coverage.  GEOSCoverage would be a fine name for this.  This is actually what I considered at the start of developing the various coverage operations.  I backed away from this in order to keep things simple.  But it does have some advantages for understanding and documenting the concept of a simple coverage.
>
>
> We had a little discussion of something much like this when bringing these functions into GEOS CAPI, whether to use a GeometryList as a container, which except for the name, is basically all a GEOSSimpleCoverage container would be doing too. In the end, I was persuaded that a super lightweight approach was better than adding another scruff of a type.
>
> P
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> postgis-devel mailing list
> postgis-devel at lists.osgeo.org
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
>
>