Jody Garnett wrote: > GeoAPI (the specification) has PropertyName .... > GeoTools has PropertyName2 with some additional/optional/extra > information that we want. > > You can see this in action when looking at the Style APIs, we did this > to put a graphic behind the text. I am not sure if the idea appeals to > you or not - or is in alignment with what you did.
Well, I don't worry about exotic styling ideas. I'd be VERY glad if my styling widget supported half of them ... But I will keep this in mind, since someday I might need this. > That is next on our list to update; we have not put it on a road map for > lack of volunteers. I can help you put together a change proposal > however :-) The plan involves stripping out the GeoTools interfaces and > using the GeoAPI ones directly.... [...] > > 2. What is the roadmap to get the whole styling API use GeoAPI > > expressions? > > > RIght. > 1. collapse GeoAPI style interfaces into one (we can do that now since > Expression works for object; they had one style for graphic and another > for feature) > 2. make our interfaces extend the GeoAPI ones; we can leave some extra > methods there in deprecated form for a bit. > 3. run through the code base and force GeoTools to only use the GeoAPI > style interfaces > 4. release Ok, I see you need volunteers. On the one hand I have done quite a bit of refactoring in my own code so got very much used to it. ;-) On the other hand I have hardly enough time to push the widgets further - and I fear if I start working on GT directly I will never ever finish the styling widget. That's why I've always tried to stay out of working on the GeoTools code directly. I hope you understand. To your steps: -> 1. collapse GeoAPI style interfaces into one Does this mean GeoTools creates another set of interfaces on top of GeoAPI? Or does this mean to tell the GeoAPI guys that their two style APIs should be refactored to one? Or am I misunderstanding you? -> 2. make our interfaces extend the GeoAPI ones Your interfaces already extend the GeoAPI ones, afaik. (That's exactly what I realized too late after my first mail.) So what is this step about? Extending any NEW interfaces that do not yet exist? -> 3. force GeoTools to only use the GeoAPI style interfaces The "old" GeoTools style interfaces were deprecated in GT2.3. Does this mean they can be removed for GT2.4. Or would it be wise to wait with this until GT2.5? I am always in favour of a clean code base where deprecations are removed as soon as people had their chance to switch. But this is not my decision. > You can use a FilterVisitor to traverse the tree structure of the > expression; making note of any PropertyName elements you see. That is what I was looking for. I'll try this. Thanks for your help. -- Matthias Basler [EMAIL PROTECTED] ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier. Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
