> What baout using the new feature model userdata instead? > Anyways, yeah, userdata is available on Feature only so it annoying to > store attributes related metadata there... > THe problem is that i need to do teh check in the GEometryTypeBinding, which needs a geometry to work. It would be a bit of work to instead pass in the Attribute around the geometry instead... i am trying to avoid that road.
> The trouble about creating a new kind of geometry is that you would > have to teach everything how to deal with it (renderer, datastores write > wise...) Indeed. My idea would be to subclass each of the geometry types. So creating a class called NullPoint, NullLineString, etc... that implemented the NullGeometry interface. Then no existing code should run into any of the exception cases which arise when something is not one of the well known geometry types. However I may have to subclass some existing classes to be "NullGeometry" aware, and nooop when it sees one. Example being GeometryCoordinateTransformer or whatever it is called. Its a hack... I know... but the best one i can come up with given the constraints of the project i am working on, limited funding, hard deadline, and a directive to take a "shortes path" approach. > > Cheers > Andrea > > !DSPAM:4007,47615f05308711628642973! > -- Justin Deoliveira The Open Planning Project http://topp.openplans.org ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
