[GRASSLIST:4617] Re: Use of -i option in m.in.e00

[Michel Wurtz]

Radim Blazek wrote:

> I think, that feature-ID is closer to the category (dig_att) in GRASS. If 
> more lines in e00 have the same feature-ID (i.e. one object consists of more 
> graphic elements) we want to get the same in GRASS. Otherwise dig_cat 
> (database record) would be duplicated, which is not desired. The link map->db 
> should be many-to-one in this case.

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

Here you can see that the design of Grass and Arc/Info is different, and that Grass
lacks a good attribute management system for vectors...

Michel.