Andrea Aime wrote: > I understand. Yet I feel we lack a middle ground allowing to represent > associations in an efficient way, the same way deegree did. (In my benefit/complexity table this whole multiplicity thing is a good tipping point)
I still don't see why it could not just be an implementation options; if an implementation wants to keep several values as an array and dish them out one at a time for the getValues() method that is cool. The fact that they would be able to answer a Collection getAttribute( name ) question very quickly and efficiently would be fine as well. The factory implementation would just have to be smart and notice when attributes with the same name are repeated one after the other. Associations are another matter, deegree did not represent associations as I understand it. Jody ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc. Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop. Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser. Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/ _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
