<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi,<br>
<br>
I afraid that we come to situation where:<br>
<pre wrap="">getGeometryType()
getIsoGeometryType()
getRFCGeometryType()
...
getBlahBlahGeometryType()
</pre>
Why not have only one method and only one enum (as GDAL origin -
single abstract data model to the calling application for all
supported formats).<br>
I think all ISO specific things should be internal and driver
specific. So, we will get single GDAL enum of geom types.<br>
<span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); font-family: 'Lucida Grande',
Verdana, Geneva, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 12px; font-style:
normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal;
letter-spacing: normal; line-height: normal; orphans: auto;
text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none;
white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px;
-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-color: rgb(255, 255,
255); display: inline !important; float: none;"></span>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Best regards,
Dmitry</pre>
17.12.2013 18:09, Mateusz Loskot пишет:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CABUeae8Z6U0xd+5XMtB_3LctVEc3L8iXdNF2aEmAg3PKV_dKNA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<pre wrap="">On 17 December 2013 09:03, Even Rouault <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:even.rouault@mines-paris.org"><even.rouault@mines-paris.org></a> wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Selon Paul Ramsey <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:pramsey@cleverelephant.ca"><pramsey@cleverelephant.ca></a>:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Back to this, is it OK?
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
As said in <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2013-December/037738.html">http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2013-December/037738.html</a>,
I feel a bit unconfortable with the extension of the OGRwkbGeometryType
enumeration that has possible impacts on other parts of OGR. There's perhaps a
time where we will touch it, but I'd expect it to ideally embrace Z, M, ZM,
circular geometries at once. And that would deserve a RFC.
What do you think of keeping it an internal enumeration of OGR, since that's
probably all you need for now ?
"Or have a separate OGRwkbIsoGeometryType enumeration { wkbPointIso, ...
wkbGeometryCollectionIso, wkbPointIsoZ, ... wkbGeometryCollectionIsoZ }, a
getIsoGeometryType() method that returns it, and the exportToWkb() methods
that calls int getGeometryType(OGRwkbVariant eVariant) { return (eVariant ==
wkbVariantOgc) ? getGeometryType() : getIsoGeometryType(); }"
I'd be happy to hear about other GDAL developers opinion on this.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">
IMHO, each format based on a particular spec/standard should be
supported with a separate interface (enum + functions)
per format/standard.
Best regards,
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>