According a quick search on Google, it seems to me that current argument order for GeographicBoundingBoxImpl(double,double,double,double):
http://javadoc.geotools.fr/snapshot/org/geotools/metadata/iso/extent/GeographicBoundingBoxImpl.html#GeographicBoundingBoxImpl(double,%20double,%20double,%20double) is in contradiction with common usage. Common usage seems to be (xmin,ymin,xmax,ymax) rather than (xmin,xmax,ymin,ymax). Any objection if I deprecate the above-constructor in GeoTools 2.4 and fix the argument order in 2.5? The intend is to make developper life easier by complying to the order he is used to. Unless anyone can correct me in my interpretation of common usage? Martin ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
