<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=UTF-8" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi,<br>
+1<br>
This direction from my view is more correct course of action -
make the use of spatialite more easy and ergonomic for users as it
is now and in case of success it will be used more and more. <br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
On 2012.11.26. 18:35, kimaidou wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAMKXKO4GnRFLQTNyd-R=dd99BreTf1DRAT8eMRrGVVaVvF7cxQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">Hi again<br>
<br>
I am coming back after more thinking :). I changed the subject
into Go Spatialite !<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_extra">List of modifications which would help to
use spatialite instead of Shapefile as the default format :<br>
<br>
* Create a new vector layer : should allow to choose between
shapefile and Spatialite. Let the use choose an existing
spatialite connection or easily create a new spatialite file and
connection, and create a new table there.<br>
* Tab fields, if the layer provider is spatialite : <br>
- add the ability to delete columns : currently it is not
possible<br>
- add the ability to rename a column with the appropriate SQL
command<br>
- add the ability to change the type of a column when it is
possible<br>
<br>
* Tab General<br>
- add the ability to create/remove a spatial index for
spatialite tables, as QSpatialite does<br>
<br>
* FTools and another vector processing tools : <br>
- add the ability to choose between shapefile and spatialite to
create the processed layers.<br>
<br>
I think it would be a big break for QGIS if we facilitate more
the use of spatialite. I know it is already possible to achieve
many things with DBManager or QSpatialite, but we could help the
users by letting them edit spatialite tables without a dedicated
tool.<br>
<br>
Cheers<br>
<br>
Michael<br>
<br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2012/11/26 kimaidou <span dir="ltr"><<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:kimaidou@gmail.com"
target="_blank">kimaidou@gmail.com</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi Yves,<br>
<br>
I totally agree with you and Bary on the superiority of
spatialite VS GeoJson considering performance, geoprocessing
methods, capabilities, etc.<br>
But I am still not sure beginner would be comfortable enough
using Sqlite to replace Shapefiles. I think they will be
more comfortable with the idea to keep the one layer / one
file architecture. They can off course use one sqlite file
containing only one layer, so this question could be
answered.<br>
<br>
But still, I think users should be able to use the "Field"
tab of the layer properties dialog to easily edit the layer
structure, not another dedicated tool in another QGIS menu
(or plugin)<br>
We could probably find a way to use the tools of the Fields
tab to modify the structure of the related sqlite table.
This would help a lot people to use more the spatialite
format, no ?<br>
<br>
I need more thinking :)<br>
<br>
Thanks all for your comments<br>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2012/11/26 Yves Jacolin (Free) <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:yjacolin@free.fr" target="_blank">yjacolin@free.fr</a>></span>
<div>
<div><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hello,<br>
<br>
I agreed with all you said, I am sure Spatialite
format is the future of<br>
Geo"file" format:<br>
* easy to share (one file)<br>
* easy to use, edit<br>
* a lot of better capabities than Shapefile<br>
* use same OGC Standard as PostGIS does<br>
<br>
Y.<br>
Le lundi 26 novembre 2012 15:35:24 Barry
Rowlingson a écrit :<br>
<div>
<div>> [apologies for empty previous message,
I blame google for putting<br>
> [...] next to 'Send'. This message has
real content:<br>
><br>
> On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:12 PM, kimaidou
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:kimaidou@gmail.com"
target="_blank">kimaidou@gmail.com</a>>
wrote:<br>
> > Hi list,<br>
> ><br>
> > The subject is a bit polemical, on
purpose. I am used to playing with<br>
> > Postgis, spatialite and GeoJson,
which are all open-source ways to store<br>
> > spatial data.<br>
> ><br>
> > I am very frustrated by the
limitations of the Shapefile format, and much<br>
> > more by the quasi obligation to use
it as the default vector format in<br>
> > QGIS. I mean for non power users who
do not use PostGIS or spatialite.<br>
><br>
> Why is spatialite seen as a "power user"
option when ESRI users have<br>
> been using something similar for years?
Its just a file, you connect<br>
> to it, you add spatial data to it.<br>
><br>
> GeoJSON is always going to be pretty
verbose unless you gzip it - I<br>
> wouldn't want to use it for anything too
big.<br>
><br>
> Barry<br>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<div>>
_______________________________________________<br>
> Qgis-developer mailing list<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org"
target="_blank">Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer"
target="_blank">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org">Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer">http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Pēteris Brūns
SunGIS
+371 26336691
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:pb@sungis.lv">pb@sungis.lv</a></pre>
</body>
</html>