start geopandas extension #728
Conversation
|
resolves #136 |
lonboard/geopandas.py
Outdated
| def explore( | ||
| self, | ||
| column=None, | ||
| cmap=None, | ||
| scheme=None, | ||
| k=6, | ||
| categorical=False, | ||
| elevation=None, | ||
| extruded=False, | ||
| elevation_scale=1, | ||
| alpha=1, | ||
| layer_kwargs=None, | ||
| map_kwargs=None, | ||
| classify_kwargs=None, | ||
| nan_color=[255, 255, 255, 255], | ||
| color=None, | ||
| wireframe=False, | ||
| tiles="CartoDB Darkmatter", | ||
| m=None, | ||
| ): |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can you expand on what differences (if any) there are with the upstream geopandas.explore method? I think we'd want it to be as similar as possible.
That would be great to include in this docstring.
Additionally, ideally there would be a way to get valid type hinting here, but presumably that won't work if this is added at runtime to the GeoDataFrame instance.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
sure happy to add both. In general I tried to keep all possible arguments the same (hence the tiles that uses a str --> class--> str, which isn't ideal but I'm hard conditioned to type tiles='CartoDB Positron') any time I explore.
the one thing I know is different is classification_kwargs used here vs classification_kwds used in geopandas, but I'll switch it to martin's version for compat. Otherwise, any arguments available in explore have the same name. Those that don't map between the two are unique to the backengs, e.g. layer_kwargs here vs style_kwds in vanilla explore
also I generally use numpy docstrings but I think the rest of the packages uses another format, so I should probably update that too
|
Keep me in the loop. Happy to do a proper review of this from the geopandas perspective once @kylebarron is happy. |
|
i think this should be ready, though I'm not the best with type hints or google docstrings |
|
Can you check why pre-commit is still failing? You should be able to run it locally with |
|
@martinfleis do you have any comments on this PR? I'd like to get in #753, which in general raises the code quality of the code base, and then ensure that this PR meets that bar as well. |
lonboard/geopandas.py
Outdated
| elevation : Name of column on the dataframe used to extrude each geometry or | ||
| an array-like in the same order as observations. Defaults to None. | ||
| extruded : Whether to extrude geometries using the z-dimension. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I probably don't follow here. Shouldn't extruded be automatically True when elevation is provided? Like the two are tied together, no? Or can I use extruded without elevation? What does it extrude on, then, Z coordinate? How?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i agree this is a little awkward. There's probably no need for the bool, though I was just trying to follow the viz/Layer API which treats them separately. Happy to go with consensus here.
Another small wrinkle is that sometimes in GIS or CAD software (IIRC anyway) 'elevation' sometimes refers to the height beneath the polygon, e.g. so you can drop the extruded poly onto a DEM for things like viewsheds. In that case I want to say this parameter is called 'extrusion_height' or something? No real opinion here, just something to consider in case folks are coming from that world
There was a problem hiding this comment.
i removed the bool so that its turned on automatically if elevation is passed
Co-authored-by: Kyle Barron <[email protected]>
|
I merged #753; would you be able to merge in latest main? |
|
looks like the only remaining failures are from the demo notebook. Could probably fix many of them, but seems a little overkill to add type annotations to some quick functions in an example notebook |
|
fixed annotations in the notebook so im not sure what the lingering failure is |
to begin review. The notebook at examples/explore should run through and demonstrate functionality. I need to take a look at how you prefer to test against Maps