From @trailway on July 19, 2016 17:57
I recently encountered some shape files which the reader does not handle. It can be debated whether the files are correct but they do work in ArcMap! What happens is that the content length does not include M content which is present (although it's presence is benign because the value says that it is not meaningful). This makes the reader fail because it walks through shape geometry using content length, i.e. it expects the next element to begin at the location just after the location where the previous element ended. This works in ArcMap because they use the shape index. I think that using the shape index (which is a required file) is a more stable approach.
Copied from original issue: NetTopologySuite/NetTopologySuite#112
From @trailway on July 19, 2016 17:57
I recently encountered some shape files which the reader does not handle. It can be debated whether the files are correct but they do work in ArcMap! What happens is that the content length does not include M content which is present (although it's presence is benign because the value says that it is not meaningful). This makes the reader fail because it walks through shape geometry using content length, i.e. it expects the next element to begin at the location just after the location where the previous element ended. This works in ArcMap because they use the shape index. I think that using the shape index (which is a required file) is a more stable approach.
Copied from original issue: NetTopologySuite/NetTopologySuite#112