On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 05:53:20PM +0530, Chaitanya kumar CH wrote: > Thank you very much for pointing out the errors. I could blame it on the > lack of enough sample data but that's just laziness. I should have read the > specifications more throughly.
I noticed primarly because the GDAL interpretation would have not map 1:1 with the ISO SQL/MM topology model implemented in PostGIS. > I see your first point but I need to dig deeper for the second. The second point is not very clear in the GML document. About TopoSurface, it says: `` gml:TopoSurface represents a homogeneous topological expression, a set of directed faces, which if realized are isomorphic to a geometric surface primitive. '' I'm guessing that "realizing the set of" (F1,F2) means deploying it, or "burning" it, "filling" it.... "unioning" it. > > +------+------+ > > | F1 | F2 | > > +------+------+ > > > > A surface/polygon formed by the two faces above (F1,F2) should be > > represented as: > > > > <TopoSurface id="P1"> > > <directedFace> <Face id="F1"/> </directedFace> > > <directedFace> <Face id="F2"/> </directedFace> > > </TopoSurface> The simple geometry resulting from the above would be this: +-------------+ | P1 | +-------------+ --strk; () Free GIS & Flash consultant/developer /\ http://strk.keybit.net/services.html _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list gdal-dev@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev