>From user point this relation is correct but from geos point - not. The problem is that this polygon(and many others) was skipped without any warnings. You cannot fix it if you dont know where error is.
On 7 May 2012 01:17, Sven Geggus <[email protected]> wrote: > Ramas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > how do you solve problem with skipped invalid polygons? > > Fix it in the osm database? > > > with error: > > Self-intersection at or near point 2889220.2400000002 7470212.1299999999 > > This does not look as a valid polygon to me at leadt in OGC Simple > Features terms. This could arguably get fixed in osm2pgsql code > because it is know how it is meant to be in this case, but it is not > a valid OGC Simple Features polygon. > > Just add an additional way around 160596899 and 160596916 and declare > this one of type inner. > > > I patched osm2pgsql and it allows to import such polygons. Mapnik renders > > it correctly. > > Not a good Idea IMO because there is more than Mapnik and quite a lot > of the spatial operations in postgis will not work with invalid > geometries. > > >Does we need such validations? > > I definitely think we do. If osm2pgsql does import and render invalid > polygons they will never get fixes in the database. > > Sven > > -- > Trotz der zunehmenden Verbreitung von Linux erfreut sich der Bär, > und - dank Knut - insbesondere der Eisbär, deutlich größerer > Beliebtheit als der Pinguin. (Gefunden bei http://telepolis.de/) > /me is giggls@ircnet, http://sven.gegg.us/ on the Web > > _______________________________________________ > dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev >
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
