Hi Niels:
You have identified one of the ideas I put together for this Friday's code
sprint (http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/FOSS4G-AU_2012) - My motivation was to set
up some base classes allowing for complex features to be processed - since as
you point out there is very little available now.
My preference would be to add the base classes to gt-data?
--
Jody Garnett
On Monday, 12 November 2012 at 9:35 PM, Niels Charlier wrote:
> Hi Ben and mailing list,
>
> I would like to propose that some of the stuff in the app-schema module
> gets taken out of the app-schema module, and move either in a new module
> or into an existing module.
>
> The issue I am dealing with now is that I need to use a bunch of stuff
> from app-schema that has to do with complex features in the CSW module,
> but it doesn't actually have anything to do with app-schema itself at
> all (application schema mappings etc).
> In particular
> - Creating complex feature types and features from scratch.
> - Certain parts of the feature type registry, in particular the creation
> of feature types from xsd schemas.
> - The complex feature property accessor, which makes it possible to
> retrieve properties from features with namespace qualified advanced
> x-paths in filters etc...
>
> In my view these things are really something separate from all the rest
> of the stuff that is used to support the application schema mappings
> specifically. Separating these concerns has a number of advantages:
> - A module like CSW can use these features without relying on a whole
> module of which most of the stuff really has nothing to do with it.
> - People can easily implement other implementations of complex feature
> stores or other things that use complex features without having to use
> app-schema.
>
> For now I have created a separate gt-complex module on my repository
> https://github.com/NielsCharlier/geotools branch csw, you can look at it
> for what I am going for. It contains mostly copies of app-schema
> classes, with the exception of the featuretyperegistry which has been
> made app-schema and gml independant, but in such a way that the
> app-schema specific featureregistry could easily be built on top of it.
>
> My preference would be to create a new module; because it has the
> advantage of the clarity. You would get all the complex stuff together
> (because they are spread among different existing packages and can't be
> put in one package) and it would be easy to adapt app-schema to use it.
>
> Thoughts/ideas?
>
> Kind Regards
> Niels Charlier
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
> Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
> Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
> http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_nov
> _______________________________________________
> GeoTools-Devel mailing list
> GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> (mailto:GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net)
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone hates slow websites. So do we.
Make your web apps faster with AppDynamics
Download AppDynamics Lite for free today:
http://p.sf.net/sfu/appdyn_d2d_nov
_______________________________________________
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
