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
Thanks for this really nice package. Here is a small feature request: I think it would be useful to have a simple way of including a minimum coverage threshold that is required for a function to return a valid value For example, I would like to calculate the raster means for a set of polygons but only if at least e.g. 80% of the area of a given polygon has non-NA values, otherwise the summary mean for this polygon should be NA. So maybe an argument such as min_cov_threshold = 0.8 or similar?
Anyway, I guess I could always use a user-defined function for this somehow but it might be more efficient to have something like this implemented with the predefined summary operations?
Also, if I have overlooked this possibility in the documentation or you have advice on how to implement this in an simple/efficient manner I am all ears.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
For now, the cleanest way to do this is probably with a user-defined function.
With the Python version and CLI versions of exactextract you can provide arguments like default_value to individual operations directly. This would let you compute count both with and without NA values, from which you could figure out the NA percent in a post-processing step and decide if you want to retain the result or not.
Thanks for this really nice package. Here is a small feature request: I think it would be useful to have a simple way of including a minimum coverage threshold that is required for a function to return a valid value For example, I would like to calculate the raster means for a set of polygons but only if at least e.g. 80% of the area of a given polygon has non-NA values, otherwise the summary mean for this polygon should be NA. So maybe an argument such as min_cov_threshold = 0.8 or similar?
Anyway, I guess I could always use a user-defined function for this somehow but it might be more efficient to have something like this implemented with the predefined summary operations?
Also, if I have overlooked this possibility in the documentation or you have advice on how to implement this in an simple/efficient manner I am all ears.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: