SLD and Filter both allow specification of geometry property to use.
I suspect defaultGeometry is a convenience for lazy configuration, but
also allows re-usable SLDs I guess.
The semantics are vague - I'd just choose the first geometry that
matches the available symboliser, for SLD and perhaps we should throw an
exception in all other cases?
Rob
Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Hmm, fair enough, if it is limiting it is limiting... but do you have an
> example of where it is too limiting? The problem i am running up against
> right now is when a "empty" property name is supplied as part of
> binary spatial op.
>
> Now does this mean that we should get the "default geometry", or does it
> mean we should get "all geometries". Geotools internally assumes the
> former.
>
> So that leaves me doing a special case check, which would be easier if
> the first expression was strongly typed.
>
> my 2c
>
> -Justin
>
>
> Jody Garnett wrote:
>
>> Hi Justin,
>>
>> I worked through this a couple months ago - and came to a different
>> conclusion.... I did not think we could ask people to be limited by the
>> specification in this manner. So I place Expression on both sides of the
>> Operator and placed the limitations on FilterFactory, and took them off
>> again for FilterFactory2.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Jody
>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> I think i have found another gap between xml schema land and the geoapi
>>> filter model, and you guess it, it is BinarySpatialOperator.
>>>
>>> First the schema for the type:
>>>
>>> <xsd:complexType name="BinarySpatialOpType">
>>> <xsd:complexContent>
>>> <xsd:extension base="ogc:SpatialOpsType">
>>> <xsd:sequence>
>>> <xsd:element ref="ogc:PropertyName"/>
>>> <xsd:choice>
>>> <xsd:element ref="gml:_Geometry"/>
>>> <xsd:element ref="gml:Envelope"/>
>>> </xsd:choice>
>>> </xsd:sequence>
>>> </xsd:extension>
>>> </xsd:complexContent>
>>>
>>> Which states that one of the operands must be a PropertyName. The
>>> BinarySpatialOperator interface however looks like;
>>>
>>> interface BinarySpatialOperator {
>>>
>>> Expression getExpression1();
>>>
>>> Expression getExpression2();
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> I propose changing this to:
>>>
>>> interface BinarySpatialOperator {
>>>
>>> PropertyName getPropertyName();
>>>
>>> Expression getExpression();
>>>
>>> }
>>>
>>> Anyone have any objections?
>>>
>>> -Justin
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
>> Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
>> opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
>> http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geoapi-devel mailing list
>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoapi-devel
>>
>> !DSPAM:1004,4578ca53161676309890654!
>>
>>
>
>
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
