burn doesn't handle antimeridian crossings
Nobody has claimed this yet.
- Dominant language
- Python
- Stars
- 132
- Forks
- 21
- PR merge metrics
- No merged PRs in 30d
Description
Given a polygon which crosses the antimeridian, `burn` returns the wrong tileset.
at zoom=3, `burn` returns the following instead of the correct set of 4 tiles:
```
array([[0, 4, 3],
[1, 4, 3],
[2, 4, 3],
[3, 4, 3],
[4, 4, 3],
[5, 4, 3],
[6, 4, 3],
[7, 4, 3],
[0, 5, 3],
[1, 5, 3],
[2, 5, 3],
[3, 5, 3],
[4, 5, 3],
[5, 5, 3],
[6, 5, 3],
[7, 5, 3]], dtype=int64)
```
I think the fundamental problem is that `find_extrema()` just does a min/max operation which ignores the crossing.
rename to antimeridian.geojson:
[antimeridian.txt](https://github.com/user-attachments/files/23945408/antimeridian.txt)
Contributor guide
First steps
- Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
- Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
- Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
- Open a pull request that references the issue number.
Research direction
Start by inspecting `burn` and the reported `find_extrema()` min/max logic, then reproduce the issue with the supplied antimeridian GeoJSON at zoom 3. Compare the result with the expected four-tile set and verify that antimeridian-crossing polygons no longer produce the full world-width tileset.
Written by the indexing model from the issue text.
Assessment
- Tech stack
- python
- Domain
- data
- Issue type
- Bug
- Difficulty
- 4/5
- Estimated time
- 3-5 days
- Activity status
- Stale
- Clarity
- Mostly clear
- Newbie friendliness
- 45/100