Skip to main content
In Development

GeometryValidator

Related products:Transformers
danilo_fme
  • danilo_fme
    danilo_fme
fmelizard
Safer
Add more validation types and/or improve repair & diagnostics (tell us in the comments what you'd like)

18 replies

fmelizard
Safer
Forum|alt.badge.img+18
  • fmelizardSafer
  • Author
  • Safer
  • January 27, 2015
Would like to be able to validate features the way Esri does
simonl
johnt
p_c_20
3 people upvoted this
  • simonl
    simonl
  • johnt
    johnt
  • p_c_20
    p_c_20
sigtill
Supporter
Forum|alt.badge.img+24
  • sigtillSupporter
  • Supporter
  • January 27, 2015
ESRIValidator would be nice - to be sure that everything can be loaded. Instead of trying to send them through ArcObjects-writer and then getting the message on each error.
The real SigTill
joepk
johnt
p_c_20
3 people upvoted this
  • joepk
    joepk
  • johnt
    johnt
  • p_c_20
    p_c_20
lars_de_vries
Forum|alt.badge.img+10
@sigbjrnherstad I think this counts for all writers. It would be nice to have verified whether you can write your data without having your model crashed.
M
Forum|alt.badge.img+5
  • marko
  • November 13, 2015
More control over intersections would be good. Different packages seem to cope with intersedctions in different ways, SQL server spatial, ESRI, mapinfo all have their own rules on geometry validation. Be good to asign these rules in the validtor.
roland.martin
Forum|alt.badge.img+9
I'm always thrown by the fact that some features seem to come out of the invalid and repaired port, and others only come through invalid. I see the logic, but maybe it's worth adding a fourth port instead, so have valid/invalid/repaired/irreperable?
geosander
Forum|alt.badge.img+7
  • geosander
  • November 17, 2015
I would like more control over degenerate and/or corrupt geometries (especially 3D). Auto-repairing these makes things worse sometimes, so it would be great to have some influence on what to repair and what not.
ebygomm
Influencer
Forum|alt.badge.img+35
  • ebygommInfluencer
  • Influencer
  • November 17, 2015
Being able to validate geometry with a tolerance would be great

 

s.jager
1 person upvoted this
  • s.jager
    s.jager
ksu_geographer
Participant
Forum|alt.badge.img+1

It would be nice if the Geometry Validator detected the same issues that ESRI's Check/Repair Geometry tools do. I can't seem to configure the Geometry Validator to get the same results as the ESRI tools no matter what parameters I change, especially when it comes to self intersecting polygons.

jpvo
Participant
Forum|alt.badge.img+1
  • jpvoParticipant
  • Participant
  • June 9, 2016

A good documentation ascociated with sample data to test and understand the tool would be also usefull:

sample dataset for GV

.JP

M
  • mikkok
  • February 28, 2018

how about cad-to-gis validation: check if data has curves, compundcurves etc?

oscard
1 person upvoted this
  • oscard
    oscard
M
  • mikkok
  • February 28, 2018

how about cad-to-gis validation: check if data has curves, compundcurves etc?

revesz
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+15
  • reveszContributor
  • Contributor
  • March 1, 2018
Yes, an additional port for the remnants would be good. It is possible to filter the list of features coming from the invalid port but it is an extra step and usually want to know if the feature is repaired or failed.

 

 

ebygomm
Influencer
Forum|alt.badge.img+35
  • ebygommInfluencer
  • Influencer
  • August 20, 2018

Given the introduction of tolerance options to various other transformers it would be good to see it included in the GeometryValidator. Especially since transformers such as the snapper will already remove duplicate vertices with a tolerance it seems odd that you cannot do the same with the validator.

bruceharold
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+17
  • bruceharoldContributor
  • Contributor
  • September 21, 2018
Perhaps within Data Interoperability extension, or with ArcGIS Pro installed, make shapefiles accessible as native Esri geometry and run arcpy.RepairGeometry per feature. This makes a repaired feature without attribution. In Pro there is an option for Esri or OGC validation.

 

 

with arcpy.da.SearchCursor('nz_localities','shape@') as cursor:

 

for row in cursor:

 

repair = arcpy.RepairGeometry_management(row[0],'KEEP_NULL','ESRI').getOutput(0)

 

repair

 

'C:\\\\Work\\\\Product_Management\\\\AIMS\\\\AIMS.gdb\\\\f70C0F16E_4FD0_4A02_932E_176E556'

 

 

ebygomm
Influencer
Forum|alt.badge.img+35
  • ebygommInfluencer
  • Influencer
  • September 24, 2018
I see actually, the tolerance options are already there, although I'm not sure exactly what the tolerance means for some tests.

 

 

LizAtSafe
Safer
Forum|alt.badge.img+15
  • LizAtSafeSafer
  • Safer
  • October 15, 2024
Open→Gathering Interest
joepk
1 person upvoted this
  • joepk
    joepk
LizAtSafe
Safer
Forum|alt.badge.img+15
  • LizAtSafeSafer
  • Safer
  • February 12, 2025
Gathering Interest→In Development
gattogis
1 person upvoted this
  • gattogis
    gattogis
dannymatranga
Contributor
Forum|alt.badge.img+5
  • dannymatrangaContributor
  • Contributor
  • February 16, 2025

The Esri Repair function in Pro always works better than the GeometryValidator, which is inconvenient because I want to stay in FME for all data processing. I often have to run Repair in Pro to fix a certain kind of polygon dataset I work with often after processing the data in FME Form.

Reply


Helpful Members This Week

Community Stats

31,286
Posts
118,658
Replies
38,872
Members

Latest FME

Terms & ConditionsCookie settings

Cookie policy

We use cookies to enhance and personalize your experience. If you accept you agree to our full cookie policy. Learn more about our cookies.

 
Cookie settings
A product of
Safe Software respectfully acknowledges that we live, learn and work on the traditional and unceded territories of the Kwantlen, Katzie, and Semiahmoo First Nations.