2012/4/9 Tom MacWright <[email protected]>: > The GEOS dependency is not a long-term challenge, nor spatialite's licensing > - you could write a clean-room implementation of both and they would be > much-appreciated. But I don't think anyone _will_ write a clean-room > implementation unless there's a good reason to, and thus the chicken-and-egg > problem of adoption versus implementation. Standardizing abstract file > formats without easily-used implementations is not useful: formats need to > prove their usefulness through real-world success, or everyone will > implement their own.
To understand you correctly: I only need to implement a parser/reader/writer of Spatialite's way to put WKB (and the two metadata tables) into the existing sqlite file format. OGR and QGIS don't need to change anything. > Also, bringing in Spatialite means that you aren't just standardizing a > binary format - you're pulling in the OGC SFS spec or something similar for > access: http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/sfs Yes, that was one of my assumptions I mentioned initially. I'd eventually propose to add a third optional metadata table containing the (relational) schema (probably being non-relational key-values pairs). -S. _______________________________________________ Geowanking mailing list [email protected] http://geowanking.org/mailman/listinfo/geowanking_geowanking.org
