Hi Alessio:
Thanks for starting the discussion.
On 20/11/2009, at 1:38 PM, Alessio Fabiani wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm working a bit on the unsupported temporal module for ISO 19108
> implementation ... actually is in a quite good state even if still remain
> something to implement
> (http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/GeoAPI+Temporal+Implementation),
> anyway, as I said on previous emails, it can be promoted to supported state.
>
> Actually I'm writing this email not only to ask you to promote the temporal
> module but also to rise up several questions and issues I'm facing while
> working on this stuff...
>
> With the occasion of another review of the temporal module, it would be good
> to improve the actual referencing TemporalCRS with the ISO 19108
> implementations. I volunteer for this job of course but I have some dubts
> that I would like to share with you and hopefully start a thread in order to
> quickly find a good solution or path to follow.
>
> While taking a look at the GeoAPI interfaces I discovered that there are some
> discrepances between the org.opengis.referencing.crs.TemporalCRS and the
> org.opengis.temporal package ...
> in particular:
>
> 1. there is no correlation between
> org.opengis.temporal.TemporalCoordinateSystem and
> org.opengis.referencing.cs.TimeCS and moreover on the
> org.opengis.temporal.TemporalCoordinateSystem javadoc I can see a note saying
> "TODO: Retrofit in TimeCS."
>
> 2. in the org.opengis.temporal package there is no concept of TemporalDatum
> nor of TemporalCoordinateReferenceSystem
>
> those two observations let me guess that there is the intention of unify
> those two packages someway, most probably unifying the temporal.referencing
> objects with the referencing ones.
>
> Now ... this problem is a little bit blocking .... someone has some hint,
> idea or knowledge about it?
I have not paid attention to this part of the code; does the specification
point to a way forward?
>
> Should I ask this to Martin Dressuassoux or Mehdi Sidhoum?
We should move discussion to the geoapi list in order to get the background;
and then choose our own direction as needed.
>
> And also, seems to me that GeoAPI is quite incomplete on this matter, we
> maybe have to redefine some interfaces and GeoTools implementations.
That would be fine; in general I am making a geotools interface to extend
geoapi ones - and make the javadocs and helper methods as needed for usability.
Jody
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on
what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with
Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
