Hi Martin,

Long time no chat! :)

How about making DefaultFeature leverage Apache Tika's Metadata [1]
class? It's a key->multi-value structure, and uses Adobe XMP properties
to represent the value distribution.

Cheers,
Chris

[1] http://tika.apache.org/1.5/api/org/apache/tika/metadata/Metadata.html

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
Chief Architect
Instrument Software and Science Data Systems Section (398)
NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
Office: 171-283, Mailstop: 171-246
Email: [email protected]
WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Adjunct Associate Professor, Computer Science Department
University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++






-----Original Message-----
From: Martin Desruisseaux <[email protected]>
Organization: Geomatys
Reply-To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date: Monday, February 24, 2014 8:33 AM
To: Apache SIS <[email protected]>
Subject: About DefaultFeature

>Hello all
>
>Before to make proposal for the Shapefile reader, I would like to make
>some for the DefaultFeature class [1]. This class will be central to
>many future SIS developments. I would like to make it closer to ISO
>19109, GML 3.2 and GeoAPI interfaces (while we will not implement GeoAPI
>right now).
>
>A Feature is basically a map of (key, value) pairs where the key are
>names and values can be any object. Compared to the current
>DefaultFeature interface, I propose the following changes:
>
>* Replace the getRecord() and setRecord() methods by:
>    * getAttributeValue(String) : Object
>    * setAttributeValue(String, Object)
>* Remove the getGeom() and setGeom() methods, which would be an
>attribute like any other.
>
>The reason for the later is that some kind of features may have no
>geometry, or more than one geometry with different name.
>
>The reason for the former is that the map type may not be Map<String,
>String>. It may be something like Map<Name, Value> or
>Collection<Property>, to be determined in a future version. But no
>matter the approach selected later, it would probably be possible the
>get/setAttributeValue(String, ...) methods as convenient methods.
>
>What do peoples thinks?
>
>     Martin
>
>[1] 
>https://builds.apache.org/job/sis-jdk7/site/apidocs/org/apache/sis/feature
>/DefaultFeature.html
>

Reply via email to