[fdo-internals] Please review FDO RFC 39 - Spatial operator combinations support

[Dan Stoica]

I agree that Oracle's syntax is the most friendly. On the other hand, since I don't see somebody packing more than 2 or 3 operators, the proposed syntax is not that bad, like:

	SetRelateMask(FdoSpatialOperations_Crosses | FdoSpatialOperations_Touches);

And I think it's way, way more user friendly than those terrible DE-9IM strings :-)

Dan.

-----Original Message-----
From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:13 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] Please review FDO RFC 39 - Spatial operator combinations support

given the user friendly nature of the oracle syntax, is it worth supporting
that syntax as well, it makes for more readable code than bit packing?

z

On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Orest
Halustchak<orest.halustchak at autodesk.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Here is another proposed enhancement to FDO expressions. We've had requests
> to handle the more general Relate spatial operator as defined by OGC.
>
>
>
> RFC 39, drafted by Dan Stoica, adds to the list of spatial operators for
> FDO. The Relate operator is a bit more complex than the others due to the
> requirement of an additional operator mask parameter. The RFC also includes
> a reference to the OGC spec that includes a definition of the operator and
> the related mask.
>
>
>
> http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc39
>
>
>
> Have a look at the RFC and provide your comments.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Orest.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
> fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
>
>



-- 
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com
+61 405 847 168
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals