[gdal-dev] Binding java : improve it or make a parser ?

[Florent JITIAUX]

Hi all,

since some weeks i think about the improvement of the java binding. The
fact is when you look at the javadoc and the gdal API doc, there's some
difference  between them. The model of the java binding is reduced at the
minimum like geometry class.

If i remember there was a discussion about ogr and the fact it was a little
used. To make a mask with ogr and put it in dataset is not easy because the
way is not obvious with the binding. And making a geometry is easier when
you look at the geometry model.

That's why i would like to improve the java binding but there's 2 ways :
- the first is to modify swig interface. Even if i understand the code, the
problem is i'm not a C/C++ developer.
- the second is to make a parser like for XML or csv files in Java. For
example i made an enum with gdal drivers to make an instance of driver.
It's cleaner than to call it with a String and i added all information from
the driver web page in the javadoc.

The first question is : is it a good idea ? The aim of this "project" is to
be used by others, not only me.

The second is : which solution is better for you ?

Regards,

Florent
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20131211/8b8ac32a/attachment.html>