[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 08/06/2007 03:26:44
AM:
> Alessio Fabiani a écrit :
> > Maybe you are looking for this
> > http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/J2SE+IIOMetadata
> > which is quite old though.
>
> Thanks! Its look like an excellent page which is describing exactly
> what we are
>
Alessio Fabiani a écrit :
> Maybe you are looking for this
> http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/J2SE+IIOMetadata
> which is quite old though.
Thanks! Its look like an excellent page which is describing exactly what we are
trying to do! I will see if I can edit that page in order to reflect
Hi Martin,
no public links at this time ... they will be available very soon however.
Maybe you are looking for this
http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/J2SE+IIOMetadata
which is quite old though.
On 8/6/07, Martin Desruisseaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Alessio Fabiani a écrit :
> > he
Alessio Fabiani a écrit :
> here at GeoSolutions are thinking right now (and we have almost done) to
> an XML schema for ImageIO Metadata to describe coverages structure.
If I remember right, you wrote a page on Geotools wiki. Could you remind me the
link please?
On our side, our Image I/O infras
Hi guys,
here at GeoSolutions are thinking right now (and we have almost done) to an
XML schema for ImageIO Metadata to describe coverages structure.
As Martin rigthly stated in the previous mail, we need those metadata
describing as good as possible the Coverages structure, as we then need to
bui
Rob Atkinson a écrit :
> If my understanding is right, you are proposing a basic building block
> for coverage implementations to allow a configurable metadata handler
> through an XML schema.
Yes. The "interface" (in the sense of XML schema) that we have to agree upon is
the IIOMetadataFormat im
Thanks Martin, excellent explanation.
I'm very comfortable with what you propose - and I hope this explanation
makes it clearer for everyone - I suspect not many would have had the
time or motivation to try to see basic the implications.
If my understanding is right, you are proposing a bas
Rob Atkinson a écrit :
> My thought, and it was confirmed in some discussions with Bryce and also
> some private conversations with people involved in the DEWS project that
> was looking at NetCDF, is that metadata is what you get when you take a
> Feature view of a coverage.
Probably, it make
* The only thing new in "coverageio" and "coverageio-netcdf" unsupported
modules at this time is the XML schema for geographic metadata in rasters,
in the spirit of "GML in JPEG 2000" OGC specification. There is no new
Java API at this time. There is a bunch of support classes
