[gdal-dev] ISO WKB

[Dmitriy Baryshnikov]

In this case, the

getXXXGeometryType()

is more logic, than

int getGeometryType(OGRwkbVariant eVariant) { return
(eVariant == wkbVariantOgc) ? getGeometryType()  :
getIsoGeometryType(); }

Best regards,
     Dmitry

18.12.2013 0:32, Even Rouault пишет:
> Le mardi 17 décembre 2013 21:16:25, Dmitriy Baryshnikov a écrit :
>> Hi,
>>
>> I afraid that we come to situation where:
>>
>> getGeometryType()
>> getIsoGeometryType()
>> getRFCGeometryType()
>> ...
>> getBlahBlahGeometryType()
>>
>> Why not have only one method and only one enum (as GDAL origin - single
>> abstract data model to the calling application for all supported formats).
>> I think all ISO specific things should be internal and driver specific.
>> So, we will get single GDAL enum of geom types.
> I don't see it a problem if we have different getXXXGeometryType() or
> exportToXXXX() methods in OGRGeometry, provided that they document well the
> standard/document they implement. The ISO WKB encoding is a standard, so it
> can be a legitimate interface of OGRGeometry, and could potentially be used in
> several drivers ( actually if you look at OGRSpatialReference class it has a
> lot of import / export methods to various exotic formats, only used by one
> driver ).
>
>> Best regards,
>>       Dmitry
>>
>> 17.12.2013 18:09, Mateusz Loskot пишет:
>>> 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,