[fdo-internals] RE: FDO RFC 48 - Polygon Vertex Order is ready for review.

[Dave Wilson]

Silly question if the existing data is bad don't we need some kind of report to identify what needs fixed or do we have a tool that lets the customer fix the problem polygons?

Dave

-----Original Message-----
From: fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:fdo-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Leaf Li
Sent: Monday, July 12, 2010 7:06 PM
To: fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
Subject: [fdo-internals] RE: FDO RFC 48 - Polygon Vertex Order is ready for review.

Thanks for your clarification. Yes. I think Oracle should be enforced too.

Thanks,
Leaf Li

>Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2010 06:00:07 -0700 (PDT)
>From: Crispin_at_1Spatial <crispin.hoult at 1spatial.com>
>Subject: [fdo-internals] RE: FDO RFC 48 - Polygon Vertex Order is
>	ready	for	review.
>To: fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
>Message-ID: <1278939607633-5282779.post at n2.nabble.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>I think (clarification) that Oracle will indeed store SDO geometry with all
>sorts of geometric and validation errors (and FDO will retreive it).
>
>However, for spatial analysis to be carried out on the data the data must
>pass validation.  This means that the Oracle provider(s) sit somewhere
>between needing enforcement and not.
>
>I would like to think that FDO had the capability to ensure that geometry
>was valid for Oracle as other processes (apart from visualisation or
>bounding box filter) may be required to operate between individual
>geometries.
>-- 
>View this message in 
>context: >http://osgeo-org.1803224.n2.nabble.com/RE-FDO-RFC-48-Polygon-Vertex-Order-is-ready-for-review-tp5281359p5282779.html
>Sent from the FDO Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
fdo-internals at lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals