I like getDefaultGeometry as well - there was no concept of a default geometry in the ISO specifications; the concept is kept around just to keep us in the GeoTools community happy. The difficult is that we need the thing to return an Object (so we can work with ISO Geometry or JTS Geometry).
If we move 2.5.x to Java 5 as planned we can use type narrowing - and thus keep the getDefaultGeometry name. Thoughts, Jody > Justin Deoliveira ha scritto: >> I am actually thinking... I could work on a branch.. but i need to do >> the major api work on trunk (there will be a few major refactors) >> However, it will involve changing method names, which means i should >> probably deprecate them before we branch 2.4. >> >> OK, i think i will update the proposal slightly and schedule part of >> this task: >> >> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GEOT-1365 >> >> Against 2.4.x. Basically add the new methods without removing the old >> ones, but still do the major refactoring to update the codebase to use >> the new methods. >> >> So... in the short term i need to get agreement on the method name >> changes proposed in the above task. > > I don' have anything against, thought I find getGeometryDefault odd, > and like getDefaultGeometry better (but if it's the GeoAPI name, well, > what can I do?). > > Cheers > Andrea ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
