Jody Garnett wrote: > But do you not need the creation of a FeatureBuilder (rather than just a > SimpleFeatureBuilder?) in order to meet your needs.
Yes. We have the old one which I ported from community-schemas on the 2.4 branch. The reason I want to change SimpleFeatureTypeBuilder is that I want to change GML2EncoderUtils to add support for complex feature encoding. While making these changes, I discovered the unwritten contract: SimpleFeatureTypeBuilder discards namespaces, and GML2EncoderUtils fabricates them. I don't fancy my chances of getting changes to GML2EncoderUtils accepted if they break SimpleFeatureTypeBuilder. > Much of this discussion can move over to the geotools list. We are here already. :-) > My understanding is the existing datastores (being simple feature based) are > not going to be that effected by your findings. Changing the Query API will affect every DataStore. If this is done by expanding Query and DefaultQuery as you indicated, it should be possible to leave the existing DataStore implementations untouched. Kind regards, -- Ben Caradoc-Davies <ben.caradoc-dav...@csiro.au> Software Engineer, CSIRO Exploration and Mining Australian Resources Research Centre 26 Dick Perry Ave, Kensington WA 6151, Australia ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
