not showing most recent polygons

[schuem]

not showing most recent polygons

[jmigueldelgado]

by the way the app is looking nice !

[schuem]

with this projection? http://spatialreference.org/ref/epsg/wgs-84-utm-zone-32s/

[schuem]

Apparently there is an error in the geometry, i guess it is not valid...i could implement a trigger to fix the geometry on inserts and also throw an error message if this happens in the visualization

[jmigueldelgado]

what could be an error in the geometry? a hole could be an error? Maybe I can do something to fix this upstream of the INSERT

[schuem]

There are some self intersections

[schuem]

Thanks, i've seen in your screenshot that the 3 divs don't have the exact sizes, in my screen they are looking good. I will make them responsive to the screen size

[jmigueldelgado]

I am trying this upstream of ogr2ogr: https://www.r-spatial.org/r/2017/03/19/invalid.html

[jmigueldelgado]

zone 32? why? do you mean 23? I am using epsg:4326 (lat long).

[jmigueldelgado]

st_make_valid from R's sf seems to work for the first testing so I will introduce it before ogr2ogr.

[schuem]

of course 23 ... so the original data is in this projection(EPSG:32723) i guess.
Just to be sure so i can reproject the data on the db insert

[jmigueldelgado]

the polygons being inserted are already in latlong! no need to reproject.

[schuem]

i'm refering to the cogerh static dataset

[jmigueldelgado]

oh, yes, that is EPSG:32723. It is defined as latlong but it is utm. Let me transform and save it again correctly in the repo

[jmigueldelgado]

ok, the projection is now correctly defined as EPSG:32723 in the dataset, so now you have to project it to your purpose. The dataset is now called funceme.geojson. It is in fact a funceme product and not cogerh, so I thought we might start calling it correctly...

[schuem]

Ok, this really caused me a headache. The map query didn't return any results even though i was sure the postgis query is right. The projection was still wrong, it is EPSG: 32724.

[jmigueldelgado]

Man, you are right. UTM 23 is the one for Sao Francisco river. I should have known. This one is on me, really sorry! A qui, 26/04/2018, 16:14, schuem <[email protected]> escreveu:

…

Ok, this really caused me a headache. The map query didn't return any results even though i was sure the postgis query is right. The projection was still wrong, it is EPSG: 32724. — You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#11 (comment)>, or mute the thread <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AEeLVia6CCyUCsQScfXWdveYENFCd5raks5tsdZegaJpZM4Th3Rh> .

[jmigueldelgado]

ok, issue still open but slightly but slightly different: the watermask shown is apparently the correct one, but after clicking a polygon the table and graph displayed are wrong and stuck in February, although the most recent watermasks are from May. Please try to fix this before going on with the hav extraction. I am home today, tomorrow, thursday and friday I will be in the office.

[schuem]

fixed