Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Check geometry validity returns non OGC compliant result #12671

Closed
qgib opened this issue Mar 30, 2010 · 1 comment
Closed

Check geometry validity returns non OGC compliant result #12671

qgib opened this issue Mar 30, 2010 · 1 comment
Labels
Bug Either a bug report, or a bug fix. Let's hope for the latter! Plugins
Milestone
Version 1.6.0

Comments

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor

qgib commented Mar 30, 2010

Author Name: dr - (dr -)
Original Redmine Issue: 2611

Redmine category:python_plugins
Assignee: cfarmer -

If try to check such polygon: "with Check geometry validity tool, it returns "Feature contains an unnested hole", but such type of polygon is OGC compliant. I find this type of polygon in [[PostGIS]] manual: [http://postgis.refractions.net/docs/ch04.html#OGC_Validity":http://gis-lab.info/forum/download/file.php?id=1146] (pic. (i)), it's valid.
@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Nov 13, 2010

Author Name: cfarmer - (cfarmer -)

Fixed in ee601b0 (SVN r14607). Hello to all the hackfesters!

Carson

  • resolution was configured as fixed
  • status_id was changed from Open to Closed

@qgib qgib added Bug Either a bug report, or a bug fix. Let's hope for the latter! Plugins labels May 24, 2019
@qgib qgib added this to the Version 1.6.0 milestone May 24, 2019
@qgib qgib closed this as completed May 24, 2019
@qgib qgib mentioned this issue May 25, 2019
Closed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
Bug Either a bug report, or a bug fix. Let's hope for the latter! Plugins
Projects
None yet
Milestone
Version 1.6.0
Development

No branches or pull requests
1 participant
@qgib