Patrick Webb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/28/2006 01:57:59 PM:
> Patrick has ordered a copy of the ISO 19117 standard. Somewhere I > managed to scare up the hojillion ($107) pieces of cash to buy the > stuff. It's not that big either, I am disappointed. :) Just wait till you buy more than one of them. A lot of the content about how they use UML is common to them all, but gets paid for many times. :) > As for doing this as my thesis, I think that it is in fact what I > want to do. I'll need to restructure a few things (change of scope > etc.) with my advisors and ensure that I have an 'out' if things get > out of hand, but the rewards that I could reap are worth the risk and > work. That however, is between me and my advisors. So I guess I begin > with reading and grokking all there is to know about ISO 19117, yes? Excellent news! Yup, them examples in the appendices are probably the best place to start. > > I think that whatever we do, working through progressively more > > complex > > examples (start with Points, end with wind barbs) is critical to > > understanding both the capabilities and limitations of the > > framework, and > > determining if it meets the wind barb needs. > > Getting these examples up and going is after the pluggable interface > has already been coded, right? Abstract examples can be constructed before any interfaces are written, in the same way that the examples in the appendices are constructed. This is probably the way to go, as the examples can serves as an "early warning" that 19117 falls short of meeting the wind barb need in some way. In addition, the examples may highlight some features our implementation must have in order to meet the wind barb need. Once the pluggable interfaces have been coded, then we can extend the abstract examples to show how the concepts map onto our framework. > So, could/would XML be used to get the human involved and tell the > code which renderer to use, and which attributes to attach to which > feature? Perhaps I shouldn't worry about details like this yet... Could/would: yes. The framework itself should only deal with the data model specified in 19117. We're not going to constrain the user to a specific type of encoding of that data model. We could offer a default translation back and forth from XML to the data model, perhaps even from SLD to the 19117 data model. However, we should also be able to construct a portrayal dynamically, as a result of a user clicking away at a GUI. Bryce Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
