Hi, Martin, Thanks for the information. Armed with that, I say we use the OUoM interface, and port the JSR implementation to it as an initial implementation, if it's ok with everyone else.
Joe On Dec 6, 2012, at 10:17 AM, Martin Desruisseaux <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Joe > > Le 06/12/12 22:58, Joe White a écrit : >> is there a movement afoot to put a new standard in place for units handling? >> The tone of your reply leads me to believe that there isn't anything >> particularly imminent, and my own (admittedly paltry) research leads me back >> to the same choice you posed in the original email on this thread. > > My current understanding is that they will be no more JSR dedicated to units. > However since units is used in many fields, I think it was just a matter of > time before some JSR got a need for units of measurement. It seems to be the > case for a JSR about sensors which may start in 2013. So a units API may be > defined as a side effect of such sensor JSR. However if this thing happen, I > don't know if it would be possible to extract the units API out of the sensor > API as an independent module, and if it would be generic enough. > > >> what do you see as the trade-offs between a JSR 275 style interface and that >> of org.unitsofmeasurement? > > The API is close to identical. But JSR-275 was implementation classes, while > org.unitsofmeasurement defines only interfaces. Apart from that, the main > difference is the change in package name. This is a trivial issue for an open > source project. But on this very particular topic, I'm actually worrying > about GeoAPI since I don't think it is a serious issue for SIS... > > Regards, > > Martin >
