[fdo-users] How does FDO handle invalid fgf geometries?

[Traian Stanev]

It gives freedom of implementation to the provider writer. Internally the provider can use the FDO geometry stuff, but it doesn't have to.

Also, we can disagree on what is a reasonable amount of validation, depending on the underlying format. For example, while Oracle may not like polygons with self-intersections, SHP, SDF and SQLite don't give a shit and will accept it.

Traian


> -----Original Message-----
> From: fdo-users-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:fdo-users-
> bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Mateusz Loskot
> Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2008 11:05 AM
> To: FDO Users Mail List
> Subject: Re: [fdo-users] How does FDO handle invalid fgf geometries?
>
> Traian Stanev wrote:
> > Hi guys,
> >
> > I think it also depends on the specific provider, not just on what
> FDO does.
>
> Traian,
>
> Knowing nothing about the rationale and background of delegating
> geometry validation to providers, I'd say it's strange.
> Geometry and FGF processing component is a part of FDO core but not
> provider. So, moving validation responsibility to providers?
> Not to mention it causes situation that leads to reinventing the wheel
> in many places.
>
> Best regards,
> --
> Mateusz Loskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net
> Charter Member of OSGeo, http://osgeo.org
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-users mailing list
> fdo-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-users