[OpenLayers-Dev] GML format - unsupported geometry type: box

Paul Dziemiela paul at dziemiela.com
Mon Jul 27 16:13:36 EDT 2009

Hi folks,

I've been reading this thread with a bit of interest.  From what I read
gml:Box was deprecated with GML 3 so does this discussion only apply to GML
2 parsers or does this discussion extend over into the gml:envelope that
replaces gml:box?

>From my reading of the specs, the GML 2 Box element was positioned as a
"primitive geometry type" on the same level as a polygon or point.  However
the GML 3 Envelope element is not - it's an attribute of a primitive
geometry.  I don't think you can map your rectangular backyard as a
gml:envelope and pass it around by itself.  But I think you could do that
with gml:box.

So I think you are all debating whether or not a two-point box is a
legitimate geometry or if not is instead only an attribute of a legitimate
geometry.  It looks like the GML folks went down this road and decided on
the latter.


-----Original Message-----
From: dev-bounces at openlayers.org [mailto:dev-bounces at openlayers.org] On
Behalf Of Francois Van Der Biest
Sent: Monday, July 27, 2009 4:24 AM
To: Eric Lemoine
Cc: dev at openlayers.org
Subject: Re: [OpenLayers-Dev] GML format - unsupported geometry type: box

On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 5:33 AM, Eric
Lemoine<eric.lemoine at camptocamp.com> wrote:
> Hi François
>  I do not really have answers to your questions - I hope others will -
> but I'd have one comment on what we should do with GML features with a
> bounding box but without a geometry.
> I'd be -1 on creating geometries without coordinates and just bounds
> (option 3), because an OpenLayers geometry's bounds represent the
> bounds of the geometry's coordinates. I don't like the idea of
> creating a geometry from the gml:BoundedBy (option 2) either, because
> gml:BoundedBy and feature.geometry represent two different things -
> gml:BoundedBy is the feature's bounding box while feature.geometry is
> the feature's geometry. So, among your options, option 2 is the one
> that makes the most sense to me. And in addition to option 2 I think
> we could make the GML format parse the gml:BoundedBy/gml:Box element
> and place the result either in feature.bounds if there's no geometry
> or in feature.geometry.bounds if there's a one.
> What do you think?

I think you wanted to say that you'd be in favor of option (1)
I also like the idea of placing the bounds in feature.bounds, or
feature.geometry.bounds if feature.geometry exists.
So, I'm going to rework the patch attached to ticket

Dev mailing list
Dev at openlayers.org

More information about the Dev mailing list