Micha Silver wrote:
> Dwight Needels wrote:
>> On Jun 18, 2009, at 3:15 PM, Markus GRASS wrote:
>>
>>
>> "Dangles shorter than thresh are removed sequentially until no
>> dangles remain. No dangles will remain if thresh < 0."
>>
>>> PS: I hope you have now the world's cleanest hiking trails:-)
>>
>
Dwight Needels wrote:
On Jun 18, 2009, at 3:15 PM, Markus GRASS wrote:
"Dangles shorter than thresh are removed sequentially until no dangles
remain. No dangles will remain if thresh < 0."
PS: I hope you have now the world's cleanest hiking trails:-)
Thanks; I think I could have swept the
On Jun 18, 2009, at 3:15 PM, Markus GRASS wrote:
If the tool is run repeatedly, the final vector will have no dangles
shorter than thresh.
Not so sure if repeated runs are necessary. One run should be enough
to
have no dangles shorter than thresh in the output vector.
My mistake. I had what
Dwight Needels wrote:
>
>
> A) It sometimes removes lines that are not part of a dangle in the
> original vector (line B in my test case). Specifically, if two branch
> points are connected by a short line, this connecting line may end up
> deleted as part of a newly created dangle. This probably w
On Jun 17, 2009, at 11:13 AM, Markus GRASS wrote:
Maybe start with a lower threshold first, e.g. 5 ft to remove D and E
first, then increase the threshold for any other, longer dangles you
would like to remove
This is exactly what I ended up doing, and it works great. The only
question is ho
Dwight Needels wrote:
> On Jun 16, 2009, at 3:41 AM, Markus GRASS wrote:
>
>> Dwight Needels wrote:
>>>
>>> When the rmdangle tool runs into a pair of dangles at the end of a
>>> line where each is shorter than threshold (a "Y"), it removes one but
>>> leaves the other. This makes sense, because af
On Jun 16, 2009, at 3:41 AM, Markus GRASS wrote:
Dwight Needels wrote:
When the rmdangle tool runs into a pair of dangles at the end of a
line where each is shorter than threshold (a "Y"), it removes one but
leaves the other. This makes sense, because after the first one is
removed the second
Dwight Needels wrote:
>
> When the rmdangle tool runs into a pair of dangles at the end of a
> line where each is shorter than threshold (a "Y"), it removes one but
> leaves the other. This makes sense, because after the first one is
> removed the second one is no longer a dangle (it is now the ter
On Jun 15, 2009, at 2:25 AM, Markus GRASS wrote:
Then there was nothing snapped? You can see what happened with v.clean
--verbose. Just to make sure I understand you correctly, have a look
at
the attached image. I guess you want to remove the line segments
indicated by the arrows? Then the two
Dwight Needels wrote:
> Markus:
>> AFAIU, tool=rmdangle does not remove line segments, it only removes
>> whole lines. In GRASS terminology, a line has two end nodes, any number
>> of vertices and (n vertices - 1) segments. In your case, it may be
>> necessary to snap lines first, then break lines
On Jun 14, 2009, at 3:00 AM, Markus GRASS wrote:
Dwight Needels wrote:
The rmdangle tool in v.clean usually behaves exactly the way I would
expect it to, but occasionally it does not.
I have a vector generated from a raster using r.thin and r.to.vect
that has numerous dangles. In the attached
Dwight Needels wrote:
> The rmdangle tool in v.clean usually behaves exactly the way I would
> expect it to, but occasionally it does not.
>
> I have a vector generated from a raster using r.thin and r.to.vect
> that has numerous dangles. In the attached screenshot there are what
> appear to be two
The rmdangle tool in v.clean usually behaves exactly the way I would
expect it to, but occasionally it does not.
I have a vector generated from a raster using r.thin and r.to.vect
that has numerous dangles. In the attached screenshot there are what
appear to be two dangles with lengths of ~
13 matches
Mail list logo
