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
Right now the transect_mask function produces masks with 0/1 integer values, which can be turned into True/False boolean masks for downstream combination with other masks.
Wouldn't it be more straightforward to directly produce masks with True/False boolean values from this function?
Or is this to maintain consistency with masks generated by the region_mask function, where the pixels in each region by default contains the integer region_id value?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Right now the
transect_mask
function produces masks with 0/1 integer values, which can be turned into True/False boolean masks for downstream combination with other masks.Wouldn't it be more straightforward to directly produce masks with True/False boolean values from this function?
Or is this to maintain consistency with masks generated by the
region_mask
function, where the pixels in each region by default contains the integerregion_id
value?The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: