Martin Desruisseaux wrote:
>> I would think it better to adjust our property file format to include a
>> initial header containing the authority definition. But these are
>> details ... are they interesting details to you at this time?
>>     
> Maybe in the future if there is a need for that. For now there is other tasks 
> to
> finish first. So what do we do with CRS_AUTHORITY_EXTRA_FILE? Can we ommit 
> this
> hint for now, improve the javadoc for CRS_AUTHORITY_EXTRA_DIRECTORY (so we 
> talk
> about the authority.properties convention), and maybe revisit
> CRS_AUTHORITY_EXTRA_FILE later if there is a need and less rush?
>   
This is kind of a silly situtation; more 99% of uses users simply want 
to add more "EPSG" codes ... sure remove the Key. The reason I was 
resisting was an earlier wish to have:
- epsg.properties - the official ones
- extra.properties - the extra ones in common use
- custom.properties - additional user supplied ones

I certainly can assign each of these to different paths... so lets move on.

For my part I will move on to epsg-oracle (I am getting sick of 
geoserver planning and could use some code about now).

Jody

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by DB2 Express
Download DB2 Express C - the FREE version of DB2 express and take
control of your XML. No limits. Just data. Click to get it now.
http://sourceforge.net/powerbar/db2/
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel

Reply via email to