Hi, On 05/24/11 12:04, Igor Brejc wrote:
Yes, but is it really? It's a storage format, you need a 3rd party driver to read it
Same for anything that uses protocol buffers, or for shapefiles, isn't it?
and it's optimized for querying, not for storing high volume of data in an efficient manner. And it's a database without a standard schema.
I think that's right (apart fro the "optimized for querying" part perhaps because I think it is very much in the hands of whoever creates the spatiallite file whether it is good for querying or not).
I see spatialite as a good way for thick clients to store geo data without the need for an extra DB installation, but not as a good way to exchange data files (as opposed to osm.pbf, for example).
Maybe I misunderstood. I thought that you had said "oh, shapefiles don't do 64 bit IDs, maybe we should write a replacement for shapefiles then", and I pointed out that such replacements IMHO already exist; I didn't claim that they were a good OSM data transport format, and there's no reason to invent a new OSM data transport format either IMHO.
Bye Frederik _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openstreetmap.org http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
