[gdal-dev] ESRI file geodatabase support

[Matt Wilkie]

[Chris]
>> "While ESRI would ideally like to open the file geodatabase format
>> in a manner similar to what we did for shapefiles when we released
>> ArcView 2, geodatabases are complex and can be easily corrupted
>> outside the ArcGIS environment."
>
> Well, that to me says that either ESRI is mis-informing us, or it's a
> lousy format! I'm guessing the latter.

It is perfectly correct to say an f-gdb is easy to corrupt outside of
ArcGIS, as are both coverages and shapefiles. All three consist of many
components visible in the filesystem and messing with them is an
invitation to breaking things. Since the f-gdb has many more pieces than
it's predecessors it has a corresponding, and non-linear, increase in
the number of potential failure points. That said, it's convenient for
ESRI to use that as a shield to not be more forthcoming; they have a lot
to gain.

[Ivan]
> ...but by the other hand, to develop and maintain the API would also
> be costly. So why should they do that? To give to the world a new
> free format so that people could use it without an ArcGIS license?

The should do it because their customers need it to conduct their work 
as smooth and efficient manner as possible. It's about being free to use 
the best tool for the job at hand.

It is true that many, myself included, would take the public spec and 
use it avoid buying more licenses. However I, or rather my employer, 
also own and maintain dozens of ESRI licenses, as well as Global Mapper, 
ERMapper, PCI, Manifold, and others, and have done so for many years. We 
desire and expect these and other applications to interact with each 
other with a minimum of hassle. I and my colleagues should be spending 
our time analysing and making maps and not packaging and re-packaging 
and re-packaging the same bits from format to format for task X that Y 
program does better than Z.

I'd also like to point out that not having a straight route for data 
exchange makes it just as difficult get information *into* the ESRI 
toolchain as it does to get it back out again. I *like* Arcmap. For 
cartography there is no other product that comes even close. When it 
comes to large volumes or repetitve cycles of data conversion though, 
it's gdal/ogr all the way.

...hmmm, I seem to have ended up in rants-ville without meaning to go 
there. And the ears that really need to hear this probably aren't in the 
room anyhow. Better stop now and get to analysing some data instead of 
carrying on. :)

best regards and enjoy the weekend everyone,

-matt