[fdo-internals] New RFC10 Is Posted

Frank Warmerdam warmerdam at pobox.com
Tue Sep 11 10:37:15 EDT 2007

Traian Stanev wrote:
>> This is clearly an aspect of FDO I don't understand.  I do not
> understand
>> what override apis are or how it is possible to call custom c++
> methods
>> from a particular provider when we don't even install include files
> for
>> them (to the best of my knowledge).  I guess this "provider specific
>> APIs" stuff is seems foreign to me because I have always tried hard
>> to avoid it in GDAL/OGR.
> Hi Frank, 
> The WMS override headers are there together with the FDO header, so in
> theory they are there. However, I do agree with you that having API
> specific to providers goes against the abstraction that is FDO. It makes
> the client code have to special case providers, which automatically
> reduces the value of the FDO API abstraction.


I stand corrected!  I presume these overrides are rarely used, is that right?
As far as I can tell most things that can be manipulated via these custom
provider apis (overrides I guess...) can also be controlled using the
generic APIs and configuration xml for the GDAL provider.  Is that generally
the case?  That the override apis are roughly speaking APIs to set and
manipulate the stuff you could set in the configuration file?

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    | President OSGeo, http://osgeo.org

More information about the fdo-internals mailing list