Martin, This looks really good and it would seem that #2 would help "future-proof" this component. Let's go with that?
Adam On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 5:26 AM, Martin Desruisseaux <[email protected]> wrote: > Apache SIS metadata objects can represent themselves as a java.util.Map > view or a tree. Up to now, those views were matching almost exactly the > Java interfaces. But now we have a mismatch between the Java interfaces > used by trunk (ISO 19115:2003) and the model partially available in > Apache SIS (ISO 19115:2014). Which model should we show in Map views, > tree views and string representations? > > Examples: a small metadata block according ISO 19115:2003 model (the one > currently shown by Apache SIS trunk): > > Citation > ??Title...................................................... European > Petroleum Survey Group > ??Cited responsible party > ? ??Organisation name...... Oil and Gas Producers > ? ??Contact info > ? ? ??Online resource > ? ? ??Linkage............ http://www.epsg.org > ? ? ??Function......... Information > ? ??Role............................................. Principal > investigator > ??Presentation form.................. Table digital > > > The same metadata block according ISO 19115:2014 model (the one > currently shown by Apache SIS branches): > > Citation > > ??Title.................................................................. > European Petroleum Survey Group > ??Cited responsible party > ? ??Role......................................................... > Principal investigator > ? ??Party > ? ??Organisation name...... Oil and Gas Producers > ? ??Contact info > ? ??Online resource > ? ??Linkage............ http://www.epsg.org > ? ??Function......... Information > ??Presentation form.............................. Table digital > > > The differences are small (the new model has an additional "Party" > node). Which model to show? > > 1. If Apache SIS trunk show the old model, we will still have a simple > relationship between the views and the Java interface used by trunk. > But we would have difference between the models used by the trunk > and the branches. > 2. If Apache SIS trunk show the new model, we will have more > consistency between the trunk and the branches and users can start > getting familiar with the new model. But users may be confused by > the fact that the views (tree, map) do not match exactly the Java > interfaces (until we get a new GeoAPI release). > > > What would peoples prefer? > > Martin >
