Closed dr-jts closed 1 year ago
Also coverage including holes often produce simplified coverages with valid geometries but unexpected gaps and overlaps. It is easy to produce such coverage with two holes touching each other (don't know if it is the only case producing overlaps/gaps). Example with the three following polygons and a parameter of 1.0: POLYGON (( 0 0, 0 11, 19 11, 19 0, 0 0 ), ( 4 5, 12 5, 12 6, 10 6, 10 8, 9 8, 9 9, 7 9, 7 8, 6 8, 6 6, 4 6, 4 5 ), ( 12 6, 14 6, 14 9, 13 9, 13 7, 12 7, 12 6 )) POLYGON (( 12 6, 12 5, 4 5, 4 6, 6 6, 6 8, 7 8, 7 9, 9 9, 9 8, 10 8, 10 6, 12 6 )) POLYGON (( 12 6, 12 7, 13 7, 13 9, 14 9, 14 6, 12 6 ))
Also coverage including holes often produce simplified coverages with valid geometries but unexpected gaps and overlaps.
Yes, this is the same issue.
This example creates an invalid coverage output when simplified with tolerance 100:
The cause is likely something to do with not respecting ring end-nodes in the same way on both inside and outside ring.