[gdal-dev] Motion: adopt RFC 64: Triangle, Polyhedral surface and TIN

[Daniel Morissette]

+0 as I'm wondering if there could be a better way to handle this, i.e. 
it's not clear to me how useful it is to read/write those new geometry 
types without maintaining the (topological?) relationships between the 
objects. I am no expert with that type of data structures so my concerns 
may be completely invalid too and I have no alternative to offer, hence 
my +0.

Daniel

On 2016-12-13 1:13 PM, Even Rouault wrote:
> On vendredi 9 décembre 2016 12:10:25 CET Even Rouault wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>
>>
>
>> There have been some good remarks, one regarding integration with GEOS
> that
>
>> I've taken into account in the implementation, another one regarding the
>
>> possibility to get indexed TIN that I think can be later added if needed.
>
>>
>
>> So I move to adopt RFC 64: Triangle, Polyhedral surface and TIN
>
>>
>
>> https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc64_triangle_polyhedralsurface_tin
>
>>
>
>> Starting with my +1,
>
>
>
> Friendly remainder that this motion is under vote.
>
>
>
> Even
>
>
>
> --
>
> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
>
> http://www.spatialys.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>


-- 
Daniel Morissette
http://www.mapgears.com/
T: +1 418-696-5056 #201

http://evouala.com/ - Location Intelligence Made Easy