Jody Garnett ha scritto:
> Thanks for the feedback Andrea:
>
> Just going to try and sum up where we got to (so I can think about it
> offline).
>
> -"go further" with description, that is describe what "xpath"
> expressions would be valid.
>
> Q: Would something similar to command completion
Thanks for the feedback Andrea:
Just going to try and sum up where we got to (so I can think about it
offline).
-"go further" with description, that is describe what "xpath"
expressions would be valid.
Q: Would something similar to command completion work? Ie given an xpath
expression list th
Jody Garnett ha scritto: (hi Gabriel, something for you too hidden in
this discussion).
> Hi Andrea, sorry my coding time is falling behind your feedback!
>> The touted benefits of this are, apparently, that it makes it easier
>> to link whatever data you have already in your application, and that
Hi Andrea, sorry my coding time is falling behind your feedback!
I just need to make sure that working through the DataAccess api does
not get lost in these discussions
about process.
> As I see, you want to provide data in its native format, assuming
> that you can build appropriate property acc
Andrea Aime ha scritto:
> Jody Garnett ha scritto:
>>> Why, instead of simply returning a useless "Object", can't we return
>>> something that implements an interfaces that _looks like_ Feature type?
>>> Maybe something that can list all "simple" properties around, those that
>>> geotools is able
Jody Garnett ha scritto:
> Thanks for the detailed feedback Andrea going to try to field these
> quickly before my workday...
>> DataAccess
>> -
>>
>> The interface does not say anything about being able to provide
>> read only or read write accessors. I see that there's a Store
>>
Thanks for the detailed feedback Andrea going to try to field these
quickly before my workday...
> DataAccess
> -
>
> The interface does not say anything about being able to provide
> read only or read write accessors. I see that there's a Store
> interface that extends Source, but