Hi,
On 05/24/11 17:05, Igor Brejc wrote:
Not necessarily the same thing. Writing protobuf reader is still much
easier than implementing something like
http://www.sqlite.org/fileformat.html and
http://www.sqlite.org/fileformat2.html
If you say so - I thought that dealing with protobuf files without using
any of Google's libraries was also a challenge.
I'm not talking about OSM-specific data transport format, just something
that would:
...
I still fail to understand what the problem is. If the problem is OSM
specific data transport, we have solutions for that. If the problem is
"general data transport for geodata", then maybe this is out of scope
for this mailing list, and anyway one would first have to make thorough
analysis about what requirements there are out there, outside of the OSM
world, for data transport for geodata. And if the problem is
"accessible, somewhat indexed storage of geodata for processing and
display" - what shapefiles currently are - then I believe that
spatiallite and ESRI personal geodatabase are probably the future.
So I presume Geofabrik will switch to providing spatialite extracts
instead of shapefiles once the 64bit switch becomes a reality?
Unsure. But OSM IDs are not needed in shape files so we could drop them
or simply write them as a text field, and as for number of records - we
don't do shapefiles that large anyway.
Bye
Frederik
_______________________________________________
dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
