Andrea Aime wrote: > Nope, when you're rendering you're using just the "flat", simple part > of it, or you would not be able to use it, no? no.
You can actually choose to render your content based on attributes of things they are related to etc... >> Andrea GeoServer (and generating GML) is not my only concern here; I >> would like to open the door to rich content beyond our feature model. >> Since we have failed to produce one (and something like EMF seems to >> be taking over) it seems best to sit on the sidelines. > If we cannot "reflect", "inspect" at least the simple properties out > of that Source thing, then I'm against having it around. > It just adds confusion and provides little value imho. > Of course it's a matter that the PMC should discuss, so if mine it's > the only -1 with two vote sessions you can get away anyways. You are correct Andrea, and it is important to have this conversation right now (rather then a vote). It is too late to change things for the milestone release; but when we get around to planning we can try and get a handle on the problem. These interfaces are only the start of the conversation; the next stage is to set things up so everyone is happy :-) IMHO we will not be able to make everyone happy this time around (because to do so would be to ask too much - ie FM, update datastores, complex feature branch salvaged etc...), I would rather ensure we removed as many obstacles to the FM rollout as possible. 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 [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
