Should the normal shapefile automatic conversion to coverage format in the library be skipped?
Typically, the default “No” value is correct. Skipping conversion to coverage is necessary or appropriate in rare cases that include data that can’t be properly expressed in a coverage such as: • A shapefile with overlapping data (usually polygon, but also applies to points and lines). • A shapefile that can’t be converted to a coverage for technical reasons, such as attribute field types that won’t convert, or conversions that fail due to coverage limitations (complexity, number and length of fields, etc).
