Right now the transect_mask function produces masks with 0/1 integer values, which can be turned into True/False boolean masks for downstream combination with other masks.
Wouldn't it be more straightforward to directly produce masks with True/False boolean values from this function?
Or is this to maintain consistency with masks generated by the region_mask function, where the pixels in each region by default contains the integer region_id value?
Right now the
transect_maskfunction produces masks with 0/1 integer values, which can be turned into True/False boolean masks for downstream combination with other masks.Wouldn't it be more straightforward to directly produce masks with True/False boolean values from this function?
Or is this to maintain consistency with masks generated by the
region_maskfunction, where the pixels in each region by default contains the integerregion_idvalue?