[GRASS5] Re: [GRASSLIST:4610] Re: Use of -i option in m.in.e00

[Radim Blazek]

(I switched to devel list.)

On Tuesday 01 October 2002 08:20 pm, Michel Wurtz wrote:
> The first implementation of m.in.e00 was using feature-ID, and I agree with
> you. The problem comes from the info tables, where feature-# is used for
> linking graphic objects and attributes.  So you can have multiple entries
> for one feature-ID (where some fields, like perimeter or surface,
> different). It is then safer to use feature-#,

Yes.

> except when the feature-# is
> just what you want in dig_att (like Z value of contour lines...)

This i don't understand. I would understand: "except when the feature-ID is 
...". 

How is the feature-ID used in Arc/Info if it is not the link to attributes?
Are attributes (other then surface etc.) synchronized somehow 
if two objects have the same feature-ID?

> Here you can see that the design of Grass and Arc/Info is different,

If feature-# is used as category in GRASS and feature-ID is stored as
one attribute in an attached table, it seems to be the same to me.

> and that Grass lacks a good attribute management system for vectors...

Do you mean Grass 5.0 or 5.1? Please send me some comments for GRASS 5.1
vectors if you know about any sensible data model we cannot use in GRASS 5.1.

Radim