[OSGeo-Discuss] Geomajas Geometry Project

[Frank Warmerdam]

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 1:36 AM, Pieter De Graef <piedere at gmail.com> wrote:
> On one hand there is the Simple Feature Specification which is clearly an
> Object Oriented model with the advantage that it is well known but is also
> more difficult to implement the JavaScript wrapper around.
> On the other hand we could follow a service based model (more like SFS for
> SQL) which is easier to get up and running, easier to create a JavaScript
> wrapper for and easier to translate into web services.
> As it's difficult for us to chose and as it's a pretty crucial decision for
> the future of the Geomajas project, I as wondering how you guys feel about
> this.

Pieter,

I'm afraid I don't quite grasp what you mean by a service based
model.  SFS for SQL is presumably "Simple Features for SQL", is
that right?  If so, how is that a different data model than simple
features?

Without my understanding the distinction you are trying to make it
is hard to give helpful advice.  But I will say that I feel strongly that
"in this day and age" any geometry model you use in the geospatial
field should have a clean mapping onto OGC Simple Features.  You
might need to extend it or even put off implementing some types
but it would be unwise to take a significantly different approach.

Best regards,
-- 
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Software Developer