From: gw7rib@aol.com   
      
   On Tuesday, December 6, 2022 at 10:52:35 AM UTC, Malcolm McLean wrote:   
   > I'm working on a problem where a user enters a degraded, wiggly curve (it's   
   actually created by tracing software from what might have been once a   
   rectangle, for example, but has been physically printed, then scanned, and so   
   on, so that there are plenty    
   of stray pixels picked up by the tracing software).    
   >    
   > So basically what I want to do is sample the curve at a fairly low   
   resolution, then re-fit it, to get rid of the noise. However I want to retain   
   the genuine sharp corners. So in the rectangle case, the desired output   
   wouldn't be a mathematical    
   rectangle, but it would be four clean almost straight curves, connected by   
   four corners of almost ninety degreees.    
   >    
   > The curve tends to go back on itself. It's like a coastline. It's easy to   
   pick out the real curve from the noise by eye, but harder to do it   
   automatically.   
      
   Would it help to assume that if the "curve" is close enough to a straight   
   line, then it is meant to be one, and choose the best straight line that fits?   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)