[fdo-internals] Re: FDO RFC 54 is ready for review.
jumpinjackie at gmail.com
Tue Oct 26 18:39:03 EDT 2010
I'd argue the non-technical case that MapInfo is an important enough
geospatial data format that warrants its own dedicated provider, just like:
Are all accessible via OGR, but have their own dedicated FDO providers due
to their ubiquity and that the true FDO capabilities of these data formats
are not lost in the transition from OGR.
I'm not comfortable about maintaining a separate fork of MITAB though, as
this RFC implies.
View this message in context: http://osgeo-org.1803224.n2.nabble.com/FDO-RFC-54-is-ready-for-review-tp5673351p5676841.html
Sent from the FDO Internals mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
More information about the fdo-internals