Hi Justin. I've seen your message and answered it.
Thank you very much for being so active in this matter.
Sorry about the timing.
Regards
Francisco
jdeolive-2 wrote:
>
> Hi Francisco,
>
> I have looked over the code and commented on the jira issue.
>
> -Justin
>
> Justin Deoliveira wrote
See http://gridlock.openplans.org:8080/hudson/job/geotools-2.4.x/11/changes
-
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse012070mrt/di
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 1:33 PM, Martin Desruisseaux
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm 0 (neutral) on the Node and Visitor classes - I don't really know how they
> fit in the big picture because of my lack of knowledge of styling and
> streaming
> renderer.
>
> However I ask to remove from the p
Ciao Martin,
I think I am not expressing my thoughts clearly or least the message
is not getting throug., Let me rephrase because I think our views are
closer than what's your perception of them.
--->My thoughts<
I am NOT suggesting to removeNoData values, scale and offset
values for the
Okay I am starting to clue in ... the difficulity is that everything is
supposed to slot together (with
different assumptions that what is proposed).
Martin do you have a write up on your preferred implementation - or are
we supposed to read the
specifications for the details. My concern is that
Jody Garnett a écrit :
> Martin do you have a write up on your preferred implementation - or are
> we supposed to read the
> specifications for the details. My concern is that this is an existing
> implementation for something that
> is rather needed; something that is very hard to say no to.
My
I just had a talk with a scientist co-worker in my laboratory (this laboratory
is fully dedicaced to remote sensing), and he suggested that while binding the
"sampleToGeophysics" transform to SampleDimension seems raisonable, the
"sampleToGeophysics" name may be part of the problem. For some sci
Adrian Custer ha scritto:
> Hey,
>
> Did the PMC ever formally decide what we were doing, going forward,
> about requiring commit access? Are we going to require that of
> contributors?
> (If so, then that's something else Mathieu would have to do.)
Yeah, I forgot about the contributor agreeme
I'm 0 (neutral) on the Node and Visitor classes - I don't really know how they
fit in the big picture because of my lack of knowledge of styling and streaming
renderer.
However I ask to remove from the proposal the new Category hierarchy. I realize
that the existing Category class may need to b
Simone Giannecchini a écrit :
> Do not belive me, just check what the rest of the world is doing:
> -gdal
> -esri arcsde
> -grass
> -hdf
> -netcdf
At least NetCDF and HDF have the following attributes:
- scale
- offset
- nodata
This is even part of OGC specification: OGC-01-004: Grid Co
10 matches
Mail list logo
