Summarizing the above, is there something akin to what a PointOnMultiPartAreaOverlayer would do, if it existed?
The PointOnAreaOverlayer does not support aggregates. The SpatialRelator does, though, so assuming you only need polygon outputs you could do this:

The PointOnAreaOverlayer does not support aggregates. The SpatialRelator does, though, so assuming you only need polygon outputs you could do this:

Thanks! And thanks for the supporting picture. I'll give it a try tomorrow.
The PointOnAreaOverlayer does not support aggregates. The SpatialRelator does, though, so assuming you only need polygon outputs you could do this:

Thanks @francoissimard9 so much for the quick solution. @daleatsafe I recommend a user experience improvement. Sometimes a little redundancy goes a long way. The PointOnAreaOverlayer name implies you can use it on any type of area, so why not make it so? Perhaps an option in the parameters which lets the user check/enable something like "keep multi-part areas" or similar verbiage. Even if this is solved by using the SpatialRelator, I believe this functionality needs to also exist in the PointOnAreaOverlayer since that may be the first transformer thought of when dealing with areas and points.
Hi @pvaziri - actually we've already done this for FME2017! You now have a parameter that controls whether we deaggregate input. If you do it would solve this issue - and you could reaggregate the data again afterwards. I believe we added this to the following transformers:
AreaOnAreaOverlayer,
Bufferer,
Dissolver,
DonutHoleExtractor,
Intersector,
LineOnAreaOverlayer,
LineOnLineOverlayer,
PointOnAreaOverlayer,
PointOnLineOverlayer,
PointOnPointOverlayer,
SurfaceOnSurfaceOverlayer, AreaBuilder,
LineJoiner,
MinimumAreaForcer,
Triangulator
Thanks @francoissimard9 so much for the quick solution. @daleatsafe I recommend a user experience improvement. Sometimes a little redundancy goes a long way. The PointOnAreaOverlayer name implies you can use it on any type of area, so why not make it so? Perhaps an option in the parameters which lets the user check/enable something like "keep multi-part areas" or similar verbiage. Even if this is solved by using the SpatialRelator, I believe this functionality needs to also exist in the PointOnAreaOverlayer since that may be the first transformer thought of when dealing with areas and points.
Hi @pvaziri - actually we've already done this for FME2017! You now have a parameter that controls whether we deaggregate input. If you do it would solve this issue - and you could reaggregate the data again afterwards. I believe we added this to the following transformers:
AreaOnAreaOverlayer,
Bufferer,
Dissolver,
DonutHoleExtractor,
Intersector,
LineOnAreaOverlayer,
LineOnLineOverlayer,
PointOnAreaOverlayer,
PointOnLineOverlayer,
PointOnPointOverlayer,
SurfaceOnSurfaceOverlayer, AreaBuilder,
LineJoiner,
MinimumAreaForcer,
Triangulator