Bryce L Nordgren ha scritto: > If at all possible, since neither OGC nor ISO includes this, I would strive > to avoid modifying the Feature interface itself. I see two alternatives > which may provide you the required functionality: > > 1] Make a wrapper which decorates any Feature with an additional > getVersion():String method; or
Nope, this does not work. Datastore do return Feature implementations, so whatever wrapper you use it must implement the Feature interface and provide the versioning information. We're back to the original problem. > 2] Extend Feature with VersionedFeature in GeoAPI, making the distinction > between "neat stuff" and "standards-derived" clear. We're talking about org.geotools.feature.Feature here, which does not have anything to deal with geoapi one. (http://javadoc.geotools.fr/2.3/org/geotools/feature/Feature.html) What strikes me as odd is that WFS explicity foresee an attribute for feature version, yet you're right in saying that GML does not foresee a version attribute in the AbstractFeatureType. This seems to me a hole, an inconsistency in the OGC spec. As for the ISO one, sorry but I feel everyone caring about open source should not give a dime to standard bodies that make you pay hundreds of dollars to look at a standard. OGC already went down a dangerous slope by providing more and more complex standard, have them depend on closed stuff will eventually make OGC stuff impossible to handle for the open source world. Cheers Andrea ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
