[fdo-internals] RE: [fdo-users] PostGIS : new feature class naming proposition

[Traian Stanev]

Why don't you just drop the ~ stuff altogether.

People may have to recreate their MapGuide layers after this, but the code would be less complex. If it's well documented in the release notes, it wouldn't be a problem.

Traian


> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:fdo-internals-
> bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Jason Birch
> Sent: Tuesday, February 12, 2008 1:22 PM
> To: FDO Internals Mail List
> Cc: FDO Users Mail List
> Subject: [fdo-internals] RE: [fdo-users] PostGIS : new feature class
> naming proposition
>
> Hi Bruno,
>
> I'd suggest moving this conversation to the FDO-internals list, as it
> is
> supposed to be more focussed on core development.
>
> I can't think of any draw-backs to this approach.  Are there any cases
> where a feature class becomes disassociated from its connection and you
> have to work your way backwards?  Or you would need to access a
> different schema from that connection?  I'm thinking probably not...
>
> I'm thinking that not having the schema name in the feature class will
> potentially make transferring feature classes from one schema or
> database to another easier (using Fdo2Fdo or something similar).
>
> Jason
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruno Scott
> Subject: [fdo-users] PostGIS : new feature class naming proposition
>
> We are actively debugging the postgis provider.
> And i have a proposal for the featureclass name
>
> Actually , on the connection string we specify the datastore.
> As this datastore is phycally the schema name so there is no need to
> include
> it in the featureclass name
>
> So i suggest to get rid of this schema name but to keep backward
> compatibility
>
> So if someone use an fdo function having a featureclass name as an
> input
> parameters
> both "schema~table" or "table" will work
>
> but if we ask the provider to give us the list of featureclass name
> it will only return "table"
>
>
> Is that ok?
>
> Bruno
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals