Jody Garnett a écrit :
> 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
"epsg.properties" should not be anymore "the official ones" if we replace
epsg-wkt by a database-backed EPSG factory, so the "epsg.properties" filename
would be available for extra or custom EPSG codes.
The "extra.properties" and "custom.properties" are nice proposal too, and I
admit that I don't really follow my "epsg.properties" convention myself in every
cases (e.g. "extension.properties" in unsupported/epsg-extra module; since it is
unsupported, we can still rename it to a more consistent naming scheme).
CRS_AUTHORITY_EXTRA_FILE is a legitimate hint; I'm just not sure how to nail it
down with the existence of various authority namespaces right now (should we
rename this hint as EPSG_EXTRA_FILE? Should we rely on the "AUTHORITY[...]"
element in WKT? Should we declare the authority on the first line of the
properties file?). If there is not a use for it right now, I feel safer if we
wait for the need to manifest itself in order to have a clearer picture about
how we should implement that.
Thanks for all your work,
Martin
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
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
