Andrea Aime wrote: >>> Got it, but there were two questions here. The first one is still >>> unanswered: >>> "attributes are non qualified". Hum, what do we do with GML Feature >>> attributes like gml:name? >> I would guess that SimpleFeature would not be applicable then? Um >> "gml:name" is an odd case because "gml" is a prefix; the formal >> unambigous name would be bit longer and represented as a formal Name >> object right? > Well, if simple feature cannot be used there, then it's useless from > the GeoServer point of view... I was hoping for something we can > actually use in GeoServer too, there is no way we switch to complex > features right away. Perhaps I am mis understanding; would you not just refer to the the above as "name" ? Are you getting conflicts between gml:name and something else? >> I was explaining the API not changing it: >> - Association.getRelated() follows your association >> - Association.getValue() is the same as getRelated().getValue(). > I was thinking that getValue() would return Attribute. I mean, > it would be consistent with ComplexAttribute.getValue() returning > List<Property> no? The only thing that returns the actual value directly > is Attribute. Yet, it may work the way you suggest too... I think I need to see a code example on this one. Jody
------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2005. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
