[fdo-internals] RFC Reminder

[Jason Birch]

I'm wondering if it might make sense to put spatial functions into their
own category, rather than lumping them into intrinsic.  Actually I'm not
entirely sure what an intrinsic function means in this context, maybe
it's the same as spatial :)  Hmm.  I guess this doesn't make all that
much sense either though, as there are spatial aggregate functions and
spatial conversion functions.
 
This isn't related to the RFC, but is there some kind of function
registry in FDO?  I'm wondering what the potential is for providers to
expose provider-specific functions that do the same thing but are named
differently?
 
Jason

________________________________

From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org
[mailto:fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Thomas
Knoell
Sent: Friday, July 27, 2007 08:13
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: [fdo-internals] RFC Reminder



Hi everyone

 

As indicated in an e-mail dated July 17th, FDO RFC 5
(http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc5) had been posted and is ready
for review. Please complete the review of the RFC and comment on it by
end-of-day Tuesday, July 31st. If no changes are required, it is my
intent to motion that a vote for the acceptance of RFC5 be made and
subsequently voted on by the PSC. 

 

Thanks

 

  Thomas

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/fdo-internals/attachments/20070727/cc264c6a/attachment.html