Hi Tobias,
Please see my comment below.
Am 08.05.20 um 13:52 schrieb Tobias Wendorff:
Am 08.05.2020 um 11:30 schrieb Matthias Kuhn:
I do not want to trigger a evangelical discussion here. I'd like to see
where we are and what we can reasonably do to have a default file format
which can be recommended with no bad feelings.
Two downsides of GPKG, which I've experienced with many users, who
worked with Shapefiles in the past:
1. A GPKG can contain multiple layers, but has one filename only. This
confuses many users. They're expecting single files, like
"houses_poly.gpkg" and "houses_point.gpkg". When they only see
"houses.gpkg", they think they're missing anything. From the normal
Windows Explorer (don't know about Nautilus etc.), you also cannot watch
inside the GPKG file to check its content. It would be nice to make
Windows parse GPKG's/sqlite3's metadata.
To me, this is not a downside, but a big, big plus! Fewer mess on the
file system.
And it is the whole point of a Geopackage, to package many data sets
into one file, so it can be easily shared.
I think we should concentrate in this discussion on the real technical
issues, and not on philosophical differences or different workflows,
which certainly have their pros and cons.
If you want to discuss this, please open a separate thread on it.
Thanks,
Andreas
_______________________________________________
QGIS-Developer mailing list
[email protected]
List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
