You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
This issue is to suggest that the spatial data provided with the package could be stored as a Geopackage, rather than as .Rda files.
This reduces the language-specific aspect of the data, and makes it readable from other languages as well. Alternatives include shapefiles (vendor specific) and GeoJSONs (slower loading for larger files, I think).
This change would require adding a data access function that reads in the package data, e.g. get_colombia_regions(admin_level = n), but this could be a good way to access any of the three admin levels via an argument to the function.
Happy to chat or help with this as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
This issue is to suggest that the spatial data provided with the package could be stored as a Geopackage, rather than as
.Rda
files.This reduces the language-specific aspect of the data, and makes it readable from other languages as well. Alternatives include shapefiles (vendor specific) and GeoJSONs (slower loading for larger files, I think).
This change would require adding a data access function that reads in the package data, e.g.
get_colombia_regions(admin_level = n)
, but this could be a good way to access any of the three admin levels via an argument to the function.Happy to chat or help with this as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: