[postgis-devel] WKT Raster: Back from RT_ to ST_

[Pierre Racine]

I very much like Regina's dogs, horses and pets interpretation! A love
animal and find that WKT Raster is a wild beast (difficult to tame
though :-)

>-----Original Message-----
>From: postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net
[mailto:postgis-devel-
>bounces at postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of Paragon Corporation
>Sent: 3 avril 2009 07:30
>To: 'PostGIS Development Discussion'
>Subject: RE: [postgis-devel] WKT Raster: Back from RT_ to ST_
>
>Strk,
>Your code wouldn't just work anyway.  There is enough variant between
the
>IBM, MS, Oracle, PostGIS, ArcSDE (dear I mention MySQL here) versions
that
>the "just work" idea doesn't "just work".  At best you are talking
about
>portability of knowledge.  It would just "sort of work".
>
>For example MS uses camel case so its STIntersects not ST_Intersects.
>Oracle based on my understanding if you use ST_GeomFromText you get a
>generic geometry object, but if you use ST_PolygonFromText you get a
>qualified Polygon object with completely different structure. Then
Oracle
>has this whole ordinate array thing going on. I think IBM comes closest
to
>being cross compatible with PostGIS but they allow mixed SRIDs I think
and
>silently convert. Oracle ST_Distance takes unit type as an arg. So
that's
>why I'm not too too bothered that we use ST_ a little more than we
should.
>
>The reason I like the overloading idea for RASTER is that if you had
written
>code to work with PostGIS geometries and later decided you want it to
work
>with RASTER, I think its an easier exercise if RASTER uses the same
names.
>Otherwise you'd have to macro replace the code everywhere.  You'd
probably
>still need to test and depending on the language rewrite since the
outputs
>are different, but my feeling is that it's a bit of an easier task if
the
>names are the same.
>
>Thanks,
>Regina
>
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net
>[mailto:postgis-devel-bounces at postgis.refractions.net] On Behalf Of
strk
>Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 4:39 AM
>To: PostGIS Development Discussion
>Subject: Re: [postgis-devel] WKT Raster: Back from RT_ to ST_
>
>On Thu, Apr 02, 2009 at 08:26:38PM -0400, Paragon Corporation wrote:
>> Yap ST_ thingy should have been left for only ISO stuff.  Right now I
>> feel sort of torn since the damage has already been done; seems like
a
>> lot of effort to correct the wrong.  Maybe we can revisit in 2.0.
>>
>> I do like the idea of overloading ST for raster though, but I think
>> Paul was dead set against the idea because it would break OGC
>compatibility.
>
>Actually, I think anyone using postgis-specific things should use the
>version with no ST_ prefix. When you use ST_ it's because you're hoping
your
>code will "just work" with any ISO-compliant thingy.
>
>If you're using rasters, and they are not ISO-standard, you should use
>Intersect() for both rasters and vectors. You know you're talking to
postgis
>and not a generic ISO standard SF dbms.
>
>--strk;
>
> Free GIS & Flash consultant/developer      ()  ASCII Ribbon Campaign
> http://foo.keybit.net/~strk/services.html  /\  Keep it simple!
>_______________________________________________
>postgis-devel mailing list
>postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
>http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>postgis-devel mailing list
>postgis-devel at postgis.refractions.net
>http://postgis.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/postgis-devel