Justin Deoliveira ha scritto: > I can definitely see both sides here... I agree that a formal mapping is > the "right" way to do it. However, for a simple case like I think that > using a complex datastore may be overkill or an inconvenience. With the > new feature model we should be able to support this case with regular > datastores. > > Ideally we would have a simple "schema editor" on the feature type > editor page, similar to what we have now but be able to set things like > namespace uri's for attributes, base types, etc... Just a thought, not > sure if its a good one :). Oh no, I totally agree with this. Only... we need the new UI and the new config system before tacking that!!! Uurrgggh.... :(
Cheers Andrea ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
