[GRASS-dev] r.li (landscape indices)

[Markus Neteler]

Serena,

if your PC won't work in the foreseeable future, please send the patches.
Thanks
Markus

pallecch at cli.di.unipi.it wrote on 02/05/2007 03:28 PM:
> ok, I'll change the names as Hamish suggests, but at this moment my pc 
> is out of service and so I can't update r.li in the server. I can only 
> send to you the new version of r.li.
> -serena-
>
> Quoting Markus Neteler <neteler at itc.it>:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I would really get this one solved... we are currently updating the
>> GRASS book
>> (3rd edition) and it would be a pain to either not write about r.li or
>> to have
>> the names wrong.
>>
>>
>> Hamish wrote on 01/30/2007 12:45 AM:
>>> serena wrote:
>>>
>>>> If there aren't problems I'll change r.li names.
>>>>
>> ...
>>>> so:
>>>>
>>> [including Serena's updates]
>>>
>>>
>>>> r.li.contrastWeightedEdgeDensity    will be    r.li.cwed
>>>> r.li.dominance          will be          r.li.dominance
>>>>
>>>
>>> nice
>>>
>>>
>>>> r.li.edgedensity        will be          r.li.edgedens
>>>>
>>>
>>> IMO r.li.edgedensity is preferable (16 chars).
>>>
>>>
>>>> r.li.meanPatchSize          will be          r.li.meanps
>>>> r.li.meanPixelAttribute     will be          r.li.meanpa
>>>>
>>>
>>> similar enough to be confusing?
>>> what about r.li.patchsize  or r.li.mps  ??
>>>
>>> I don't have very good ideas about the other one:
>>>   r.li.pixelatt  ??   r.li.meanpixatt  ?? r.li.mpa  ??
>>>   (of those I prefer r.li.mpa, ....)
>>>
>>>
>>>> r.li.patchAreaDistributionCV          will be       r.li.padcv
>>>> r.li.patchAreaDistributionRANGE       will be       r.li.padrange
>>>> r.li.patchAreaDistributionSD          will be       r.li.padsd
>>>>
>>>
>>> nice
>>>
>>>
>>>> r.li.patchdensity           will be          r.li.patchdens
>>>>
>>>
>>> IMO r.li.patchdensity is preferable (17 chars).
>>>
>>>
>>>> r.li.patchnumber      will be          r.li.patchnum
>>>> r.li.richness         will be          r.li.richness
>>>> r.li.shannon          will be          r.li.shannon
>>>> r.li.shape            will be          r.li.shape
>>>> r.li.simpson          will be          r.li.simpson
>>>>
>>>
>>> nice.
>>>
>>>
>>>> also, because of the structure of r.li, I think is not a good idea to
>>>> lump different modules.
>>>>
>>>
>>> ok.
>>>
>>
>> I mean, we can discuss this forever or just finally do it.
>>
>> thanks,
>> Markus
>>
>>
>
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.
>
>