lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ignacio Vera (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Updated] (LUCENE-7906) Spatial relationship between Geoshapes
Date Fri, 25 Aug 2017 09:58:00 GMT


Ignacio Vera updated LUCENE-7906:
    Attachment: test-degenerate_point.patch

I think I found an issue with degenerate geopoints. If the degenerate Geopoint lays on the
boundary of a shape, the relationships between the objects are not symetrical:

The bounding box thinks it contains the degenerated point.
The degenerated point thinks it intersects the shape.

 Not sure what is the right answer:

If the answer is WITHIN/CONTAINS: Method intersects(Plane plane, ....) should always return

If the answer is OVERLAPS/OVERLAPS: Method intersects(GeoShape geoShape) should pass a plane
for a degenerated GeoPoint. In this case I think we should consider creating a Geoshape containing
a point and the plane.



> Spatial relationship between Geoshapes
> --------------------------------------
>                 Key: LUCENE-7906
>                 URL:
>             Project: Lucene - Core
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: modules/spatial3d
>            Reporter: Ignacio Vera
>            Assignee: Karl Wright
>         Attachments: LUCENE-7906-AreaShape.patch, LUCENE-7906.patch, test-degenerate_point.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
> 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

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message