[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7906?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16093239#comment-16093239
]
Karl Wright commented on LUCENE-7906:
-------------------------------------
I had a quick look at the diff, and found this issue:
{code}
+ @Override
+ public int getRelationship(GeoShape shape){
+ boolean isWithin = false;
+ boolean isContains = false;
+ for (int i=0; i<shapes.size(); i++) {
+ GeoPolygon pol = (GeoPolygon) shapes.get(i);
+ int relationship = pol.getRelationship(shape);
+ switch (relationship){
+ case GeoArea.OVERLAPS: return relationship;
+ case GeoArea.WITHIN: isWithin=true; break;
+ case GeoArea.CONTAINS: isContains=true;break;
+ case GeoArea.DISJOINT: break;
+ }
+ }
{code}
I note that OVERLAPS subcomponents return OVERLAPS as the result. But this
cannot be correct because an OVERLAP between a subcomponent might actually be
WITHIN.
> Spatial relationship between Geoshapes
> --------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-7906
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-7906
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: modules/spatial3d
> Reporter: Ignacio Vera
> Assignee: Karl Wright
> Attachments: LUCENE-7906.patch, LUCENE-7906-test.patch
>
>
> Hi,
> Working with geosahpes and trying to resolve spatial relationships between
> them I came accross a big limitation when trying to solve the relationship
> between two geopolygons. This object does not expose the internal structure.
> In particular at some point, it is necessary to check if one polygon
> intersects the edges of the other polygon which currently is not possible as
> edges are not exposed.
> To be able to perform such operation it can be several options. The ones I
> can think of are:
> 1) Expose the edges of the polygon ( and probably the notable points for the
> edges) adding getters in the GeoPolygon interface. Easy to implement and
> leave users the responsability of coding the spatial relationship.
> 2) Extends GeoPolygon interface to extends geoarea and leave the object make
> the spatial relationship.
> 3) Extends GeoShape interface so all shapes can infer the spatial
> relationship with other GeoShapes.
> I might be bias as my interest is in 2d Shapes in the unit sphere and there
> might be some cases which what I propose cannot be implemented or are againts
> the aim of the library.
> What do you think?
> Cheers,
> Ignacio
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
