Hello Adam
Le 21/01/15 00:08, Adam Estrada a écrit :
> I think it would be great to see another format make it in to the next
> release and it looks like the shapefile reader is in disarray. This
> means that WKT is the next most logical implementation. What is the
> state of Marc's stuff?
As I see, the blocker issue for releasing Shapefile now is its public API:
* Shapefile should extend DataStore (the proposed common base class
for all formats).
* Should produce ISO 19115 metadata at least for the geographic
bounding box.
* Should provide Features through some kind of stream (not to be
confused with InputStream) or iterator.
* Avoid shapefile-specific API (e.g. ShapeTypeEnum) if something more
generic is defined by other standards.
There is also implementation issues, but they could be deferred to a
next release if doing so will not cause major compatibility breaks for
the users:
* MappedByteBuffer too heavy for Shapefile needs (it also complicate
the task of extending DataStore).
* Codes which, I guess, are still in a draft stage since they ignore
implementation concerns (e.g. AbstractDbase3ByteReader.toCodePage
rebuilding the same relatively large HashMap everytime the method is
invoked). I presume that this is temporary while the work is in process.
* Policy regarding logging, internationalization and formatting which
are different than the rest of SIS. I think that some agreement
would be nice in order to provide a consistent library.
But we could delay SIS release in order to provide more attractive new
features. I'm fine with either options (release without new format or
delay).
Martin
