> Greetings comrades, > >> Contacting sydney revolutionary cell; secret feature collection proposal >> communication >> dispatch code name "Bring Back FeatureResults". >> - http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/FeatureCollection+revolution > > I think the "preferred" option looks good. I've just got two minor > worries about its ideological soundness... > > 1. Retaining the sort method could be seen as counter-revolutionary > backsliding. A purist would argue that the glorious struggle is better > served by purging such reactionary tendencies and engaging in vigorous > re-education of the proletariat to specify the sort order with Query > in the first place. It is kind of out of the spirit of the piece; you can also see me fussing about contains, containsAll as well. The flip-side is that I did not really want want Query growing over time; which was the other option.
> 2. Could we call it something other than FeatureCollection ? We could call it FeatureResults (its original name) as noted in the proposal; but then I would get tired. A harder question is what should we call DefaultFeatureCollection? It should probably stay the same (and remain a class) but we will need to look at its closely as it will now be raised in visibility with respect to the library. Jody ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
