[gdal-dev] GML / NAS code redundancy

[Martin Landa]

Hi,

2014-04-05 12:36 GMT+02:00 Martin Landa <landa.martin at gmail.com>:
> First is related to GML registry. The input file contains different
> layers based on its internal type (TypSouboru). For each of these
> types are prepared separated GFS file.
>
>     <!-- Czech VFR schame-->
>     <namespace prefix="vf"
>                uri="urn:cz:isvs:ruian:schemas:VymennyFormatTypy:v1
> ../ruian/xsd/vymenny_format/VymennyFormatTypy.xsd"
>                useGlobalSRSName="true">
>         <featureType elementName="TypSouboru"
>                      elementValue="OB_UKSH"
>                      gfsSchemaLocation="vfr_ob_uksh_v1.gfs"/>
>         <featureType elementName="TypSouboru"
>                      elementValue="ST_UKSH"
>                      gfsSchemaLocation="vfr_st_uksh_v1.gfs"/>
>         <featureType elementName="TypSouboru"
>                      elementValue="ST_UKSG"
>                      gfsSchemaLocation="vfr_st_uksg_v1.gfs"/>
>     </namespace>

I am closer to commit support for this format to SVN (GFS files).
Feature geometry (definicni bod - centroid, originalnihranice -
original boundary and generalizovanehranice - geneneralized
boundaries) differs based on the file type (eg. ST_UKSG x ST_UKSH). To
avoid redundancy (separate GFS for each file type) I created two files
- one for ST and OB major file types (they contains different layers -
vrstva), see [1]. Currently some of classes have three geometry
columns (definicnibod, originalnihranice and generalizovanahranice)
which is not elegant but works.

I was thinking to change featureType logic in the sense that only one
GFS (ruain_v1.gfs) file would be needed. Then you would list GML
feature classes manually and define also properties which should be
ignored, eg.

       <featureType elementName="TypSouboru"
                     elementValue="OB_UKSH"
                     gfsSchemaLocation="ruain_v1.gfs">
          <GMLFeatureClassList>
            <GMLFeatureClass>
              <Name>Obce</Name>
              <PropertyIgnored>
                <ElementPath>Geometrie|GeneralizovaneHranice5</ElementPath>
              </PropertyIgnored>
            </GMLFeatureClass>
            <GMLFeatureClass>CastiObci</GMLFeatureClass>
            <GMLFeatureClass>KatastralniUzemi</GMLFeatureClass>
             <PropertyIgnored>
                <ElementPath>Geometrie|GeneralizovaneHranice4<ElementPath>
              </PropertyIgnored>
            <GMLFeatureClass>Zsj</GMLFeatureClass>
             <PropertyIgnored>
                <ElementPath>Geometrie|GeneralizovaneHranice4</ElementPath>
              </PropertyIgnored>
            <GMLFeatureClass>Ulice</GMLFeatureClass>
            <GMLFeatureClass>Parcely</GMLFeatureClass>
             <PropertyIgnored>
                <ElementPath>Geometrie|GeneralizovaneHranice3</ElementPath>
              </PropertyIgnored>
            <GMLFeatureClass>StavebniObjekty</GMLFeatureClass>
             <PropertyIgnored>
                <ElementPath>Geometrie|GeneralizovaneHranice2</ElementPath>
              </PropertyIgnored>
            <GMLFeatureClass>AdresniMista</GMLFeatureClass>
          </GMLFeatureClassList>
        </featureType>
      </featureType>

In this case OGR would report layers Obce, ..., AdresniMista (so
subset of major GFS file), Obce would define only two geometries
(DefinicniBod and OriginalniHranice). Similarly for OB_UKSG only
DefinicniBod and GeneralizovaneHranice.

What do you think? Martin

[1] http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/freegis/RUIAN#Knihovna_OGR (in Czech, but
tables should be understandable)

-- 
Martin Landa * http://geo.fsv.cvut.cz/gwiki/Landa