[gdal-dev] ISO WKB

[Mateusz Loskot]

On 17 December 2013 09:03, Even Rouault <even.rouault at mines-paris.org> wrote:
> Selon Paul Ramsey <pramsey at cleverelephant.ca>:
>
>> Back to this, is it OK?
>
> As said in http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/2013-December/037738.html,
> I feel a bit unconfortable with the extension of the OGRwkbGeometryType
> enumeration that has possible impacts on other parts of OGR. There's perhaps a
> time where we will touch it, but I'd expect it to ideally embrace Z, M, ZM,
> circular geometries at once. And that would deserve a RFC.
>
> What do you think of keeping it an internal enumeration of OGR, since that's
> probably all you need for now ?
>
> "Or have a separate OGRwkbIsoGeometryType enumeration { wkbPointIso, ...
> wkbGeometryCollectionIso, wkbPointIsoZ, ... wkbGeometryCollectionIsoZ }, a
> getIsoGeometryType() method that returns it, and the exportToWkb() methods
> that calls int getGeometryType(OGRwkbVariant eVariant) { return (eVariant ==
> wkbVariantOgc) ? getGeometryType()  : getIsoGeometryType(); }"
>
> I'd be happy to hear about other GDAL developers opinion on this.

IMHO, each format based on a particular spec/standard should be
supported with a separate interface (enum + functions)
per format/standard.

Best regards,
-- 
Mateusz  Łoskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net