> Aside: (to you this time) Incase you don't here so often enough having a > cache of Graphic(s) > as the result of applying a SLD+Feature is not that bad an idea ;-) You > simply have to wait > for us to catch up to the need for these ideas... (as I recall we could > not > contribute much when you were putting together Graphic and friends).
the thing that i've found is that many other mapping engines (many being 2) dovetail very nicely with the Feature+SLD APIs and not as nicely with Graphic APIs. the Feature APIs fit so nicely with ESRI's MOJE APIs that my MOJEGO1 Feature impls are able to go straight to MOJE objects rather than be turned into Graphics. of course, in a full implementation not based on an existing map engine (the geotools scenario?), Graphics or similar primitives are a bit of a necessity. i'm also stuck with Graphics to do things like GeoScaledImages and custom extensions (GraphicCube, GraphicCylinder, GraphicSphere, GraphicShapeFile -- yes, i know shp should be Features, but i wanted to let ESRI's MOJE APIs handle the shp to see if it could do a better job than i). but images will perhaps fall under the Coverage category, and perhaps Geometry can be made as extensible as Graphics, freeing me from Graphic dependencies for 3D objects. dunno what i can do about ShapeFiles yet though. swipe 'em from geotools once you guys finish, i suppose (^_^) ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email is sponsored by the JBoss Inc. Get Certified Today Register for a JBoss Training Course. Free Certification Exam for All Training Attendees Through End of 2005. For more info visit: http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_idv28&alloc_id845&op=click _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
