[gdal-dev] Call for discussion on RFC 46: GDAL/OGR unification

[SIMON Nicolas]

Hi list,

I'm a little disappointed because I have hoped to find in version 2 a reinforcement (unification) of the semantics of operations against the reported capabilities (cf OGRLayer.TestCapability)

For exemple, if I take the function OGRLayer.SetFeature (OGRFeature * poFeature) which is documented as “Rewrite an existing feature”
I found drivers implementing it with “update/where” which do nothing if feature does not exist (conforming implementation),
and other drivers implementing it with “delete/insert” which always insert the feature (not conforming implementation)

I think that adopting the same semantic will allow to automate generic autotests on the basis of reported capabilities (and simplify autotest).
This will also simplify applications that want to use GDAL/OGR in a generic way

In addition, these generic autotests could allow developers to validate the compatibility of their new driver against the semantics of GDAL/OGR and can give a kind of “compatibility label”.

May be this suggestion becomes a new RFC (if someone else agree with me)

Nicolas

De : gdal-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:gdal-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] De la part de Frank Warmerdam
Envoyé : vendredi 16 mai 2014 04:03
À : Even Rouault
Cc : gdal dev
Objet : Re: [gdal-dev] Call for discussion on RFC 46: GDAL/OGR unification

Even,

I have (finally) looked over the RFC and I'm super pleased.  I couldn't find anything I wanted to argue against, and it all looks excellent to me though I could imagine some some bumps in real world use.

Feel free to call for a motion when you are ready.

Best regards,
Frank


On Thu, May 15, 2014 at 11:47 AM, Even Rouault <even.rouault at mines-paris.org<mailto:even.rouault at mines-paris.org>> wrote:
Le jeudi 08 mai 2014 00:13:22, Even Rouault a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> This is a call for discussion on "RFC 46: GDAL/OGR unification"
>
>   http://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc46_gdal_ogr_unification
>
No reaction : no interest or no time to review yet ?
Or should I move that forward ?
But I'd prefer if such architectural changes could be a bit reviewed...

> Best regards,
>
> Even

--
Geospatial professional services
http://even.rouault.free.fr/services.html
_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org>
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev



--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up   | Frank Warmerdam, warmerdam at pobox.com<mailto:warmerdam at pobox.com>
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush    | Geospatial Software Developer


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20140516/516266b3/attachment.html>