Hi again I am coming back after more thinking :). I changed the subject into Go Spatialite !
List of modifications which would help to use spatialite instead of Shapefile as the default format : * Create a new vector layer : should allow to choose between shapefile and Spatialite. Let the use choose an existing spatialite connection or easily create a new spatialite file and connection, and create a new table there. * Tab fields, if the layer provider is spatialite : - add the ability to delete columns : currently it is not possible - add the ability to rename a column with the appropriate SQL command - add the ability to change the type of a column when it is possible * Tab General - add the ability to create/remove a spatial index for spatialite tables, as QSpatialite does * FTools and another vector processing tools : - add the ability to choose between shapefile and spatialite to create the processed layers. I think it would be a big break for QGIS if we facilitate more the use of spatialite. I know it is already possible to achieve many things with DBManager or QSpatialite, but we could help the users by letting them edit spatialite tables without a dedicated tool. Cheers Michael 2012/11/26 kimaidou <[email protected]> > Hi Yves, > > I totally agree with you and Bary on the superiority of spatialite VS > GeoJson considering performance, geoprocessing methods, capabilities, etc. > But I am still not sure beginner would be comfortable enough using Sqlite > to replace Shapefiles. I think they will be more comfortable with the idea > to keep the one layer / one file architecture. They can off course use one > sqlite file containing only one layer, so this question could be answered. > > But still, I think users should be able to use the "Field" tab of the > layer properties dialog to easily edit the layer structure, not another > dedicated tool in another QGIS menu (or plugin) > We could probably find a way to use the tools of the Fields tab to modify > the structure of the related sqlite table. This would help a lot people to > use more the spatialite format, no ? > > I need more thinking :) > > Thanks all for your comments > > > 2012/11/26 Yves Jacolin (Free) <[email protected]> > > Hello, >> >> I agreed with all you said, I am sure Spatialite format is the future of >> Geo"file" format: >> * easy to share (one file) >> * easy to use, edit >> * a lot of better capabities than Shapefile >> * use same OGC Standard as PostGIS does >> >> Y. >> Le lundi 26 novembre 2012 15:35:24 Barry Rowlingson a écrit : >> > [apologies for empty previous message, I blame google for putting >> > [...] next to 'Send'. This message has real content: >> > >> > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 3:12 PM, kimaidou <[email protected]> wrote: >> > > Hi list, >> > > >> > > The subject is a bit polemical, on purpose. I am used to playing with >> > > Postgis, spatialite and GeoJson, which are all open-source ways to >> store >> > > spatial data. >> > > >> > > I am very frustrated by the limitations of the Shapefile format, and >> much >> > > more by the quasi obligation to use it as the default vector format in >> > > QGIS. I mean for non power users who do not use PostGIS or spatialite. >> > >> > Why is spatialite seen as a "power user" option when ESRI users have >> > been using something similar for years? Its just a file, you connect >> > to it, you add spatial data to it. >> > >> > GeoJSON is always going to be pretty verbose unless you gzip it - I >> > wouldn't want to use it for anything too big. >> > >> > Barry >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Qgis-developer mailing list >> > [email protected] >> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer >> > >
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
