Hi Drew,
As I explained previously in this thread the recent kml 2.2 work was only
to support parsing kml, not generating it. So there is still some work that
has to be done to do encoding.
That said since kml 2.1 and 2.2 are generally pretty similar it doesn't
appear to be too hard. I just pushe
Hi,
We too are trying to make use of the KML support in 8.6 stable to generate
KML from ESRI Shapefiles. We would like to generate KML 2.2, but have not
been successful.
The examples online all seem to use the default org.geotools.kml package,
which results in KML 2.1 XML, like:
http://earth.g
Hi Justin,
I created a small test app to convert shape to KML. Wheras it works with
the conventional KML support, I do get an almost empty file when using
the 2.2 support.
Peter
On 12/03/2012 04:13 PM, Peter Hopfgartner wrote:
On 12/03/2012 03:16 PM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
Hey Peter,
T
On 12/03/2012 03:16 PM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
Hey Peter,
This work is really just about parsing, and actually specifically
being able to parse placemarks and kml feature data with ExtendedData.
No work was done for encoding but it would be a relatively straight
forward change. If you are i
Hey Peter,
This work is really just about parsing, and actually specifically being
able to parse placemarks and kml feature data with ExtendedData. No work
was done for encoding but it would be a relatively straight forward change.
If you are interested in working on that I would be happy to help
On 11/29/2012 07:29 PM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
Hi all,
Recently myself and a colleague of mine (Rob Marianski) worked on some
improved parsing for KML. Including support for parsing KML 2.2 along
with some of its advanced "custom data" features, ie "SchemaData" and
"ExtendedData".
The wor
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 6:36 PM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Interesting... could you elaborate on this jxpath thing? :-)
>>
>
> Sure. Basically the streaming parser, and now the pull parser, needs to
> know when to stop its main parsing cycle and return back to the caller,
> passing back the objec
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 11:01 AM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Justin Deoliveira
> wrote:
>
>>
>> Wondering about StreamingParser... should it be deprecated?
>>> More in general, what's the relationship between it and PullParser?
>>> One replaces the other, they have dif
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:52 PM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>
> Wondering about StreamingParser... should it be deprecated?
>> More in general, what's the relationship between it and PullParser?
>> One replaces the other, they have different features and thus different
>> intended
>> use cases?
>>
>
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Justin Deoliveira
> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Recently myself and a colleague of mine (Rob Marianski) worked on some
>> improved parsing for KML. Including support for parsing KML 2.2 along with
>> some of its
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 7:29 PM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Recently myself and a colleague of mine (Rob Marianski) worked on some
> improved parsing for KML. Including support for parsing KML 2.2 along with
> some of its advanced "custom data" features, ie "SchemaData" and
> "Extended
Hi all,
Recently myself and a colleague of mine (Rob Marianski) worked on some
improved parsing for KML. Including support for parsing KML 2.2 along with
some of its advanced "custom data" features, ie "SchemaData" and
"ExtendedData".
The work is mostly constrained to the kml bindings which afaik
12 matches
Mail list logo
