Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Actually I think that what I was thinking about is something different.
>
We cannot extend Expression - we can make a function - but we cannot
extend (and encode) an expression. Not sure I understand your code
example - did you mean to build up a set of geometries to return?
> class DefaultGeometry implements Expression {
>
> Object evaluate( Object object, Class context ) {
> List<PropertyAccessor> accessors = FactoryFinder.propertyAccessors(
> object );
> for ( PropertyAccessor pa : accessors ) {
> List geometries = pa.geometries( object );
> return geomtetries.get( 0 );
> }
> }
>
> }
>
> Or something like that.
>
> I like the empty xpath expression idea, but I don't see any reason not
> to add it to the FeatureProeprtyAccessor as just an additional check.
> Like that is where the check for "@gml:id" is. I think it makes most sense.
>
Well it is just that "" is supposed to return "this" - ie the feature
itself isn't it? So I need that Geometry.class hint; note it needs to be
a target for when we have non JTS Geometry interfaces. Still this whole
thing does look like a hack; I am just not sure if that is because we
are trying to implement a Hack somebody put in the SLD spec or not.
Jody
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
