Ah. Not a big deal in 2 dimensions, but I have a real problem with
this in 3D! :-) But I see in OGC 99-049 where they say:
"A Polyhedral Surface is not a MultiPolygon because it violates the
rule for MultiPolygons that the boundaries of the element Polygons
intersect only at a finite number of points."
Seems like an unnecessary restriction, but I'm sure they have their
reasons for excluding this "degenerate" case.
-- Andy
On Jun 3, 2008, at 1:58 PM, Martin Davis wrote:
Andy Anderson wrote:
I'll also note that, to be consistent, this must also mean that
MULTIPOLYGON((0 0, 5 5, 5 0, 0 0), (0 0, 0 5, 5 5, 0 0)) doesn't
have a boundary line at LINESTRING(0 0, 5 5).
Well, that Multipolygon is actually invalid - since MPs can't have
coincident line segments. So the definition *is* consistent!
I'm not sure which one that is.
It's the OGC document 99-049 (the first one you sent)
--
Martin Davis
Senior Technical Architect
Refractions Research, Inc.
(250) 383-3022
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
_______________________________________________
postgis-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-users
