[gdal-dev] Call for review on RFC 104: Adding a "gdal" front-end command line interface

[Abel Pau]

Good morning,


>> It has just crossed my mind that "gdal convert in.shp out.tif" could do a rasterization behind the scenes, but that's probably pushing syntax sugar too far...

something like "gdal convert in.shp out.gpkg" could be confusing. At least should be an specifier to force vector or raster output, shouldn’t be?



De: gdal-dev <gdal-dev-bounces at lists.osgeo.org> En nombre de Even Rouault via gdal-dev
Enviado el: dilluns, 18 de novembre de 2024 22:44
Para: Andrew Bell <andrew.bell.ia at gmail.com>
CC: gdal-dev at lists.osgeo.org
Asunto: Re: [gdal-dev] Call for review on RFC 104: Adding a "gdal" front-end command line interface



Le 18/11/2024 à 22:27, Andrew Bell a écrit :

My biggest question is why you would mix vector and raster operations

in the CLI.



And since we're taking on changing things, I would wonder why those

two parts of the codebase are commingled. Is there a strong reason not

to have an OGR project that does vector operations and a GDAL project

that does raster operations? It seems like mostly an historical

artifact.

At the beginning of times, GDAL and OGR were separate sub-projects, and it was thought in https://gdal.org/en/latest/development/rfc/rfc46_gdal_ogr_unification.html (almost 10 years ago) that they should be unified, at least as some aspects, driver management, dataset structure and metadata handling, were common between both. Not to mention formats that can contain vector and raster metadata in the same container. Admittedly, some aspects of the unification could still be perfected, like converting a dataset with both types at once. Mostly an implementation detail at the driver level...

In practice there are operations like rasterization, gridding, contouring, polygonization that mix both data types. So considering them as fully separate is not so obvious. I believe that having "gdal convert in.shp out.parquet" and "gdal convert in.tif out.nc" work in an identical way would be big progress compared to "ogr2ogr out.parquet in.shp" and "gdal_translate in.tif out.nc" . It has just crossed my mind that "gdal convert in.shp out.tif" could do a rasterization behind the scenes, but that's probably pushing syntax sugar too far...

--

http://www.spatialys.com

My software is free, but my time generally not.

Butcher of all kinds of standards, open or closed formats. At the end, this is just about bytes.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/gdal-dev/attachments/20241119/2fc9b323/attachment-0001.htm>