I prefer the fluent approach for code examples, and that is a good idea
using AttributeTypeBuilder as a delegate to avoid duplicating code.
Jody
On Fri, May 27, 2022 at 12:31 AM Roar Brænden <roar.brenden...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Thanks for the feedback. There wasn't that much of problems with unit
> tests as I was afraid of.
>
> When looking into the code I saw that these methods should have been in an
> AttributeDescriptorBuilder. I have been thinking more about it, and see
> that it could be using a AttributeTypeBuilder as a delegate. Then it
> wouldn't be that much work.
>
> Another thing about AttributeTypeBuilder is that it's taken a new fluent
> approach, together with the more ordinary with setter's.
> If we make a new AttributeDescriptorBuilder what would you prefer. Having
> it fluent like:
>
> AttributeDescriptorBuilder builder = new
> AttributeDescriptorBuilder(factory);
> AttributeDescriptor attribute = builder.name
> ("location").typeName("gml:PointPropertyType").binding(Point.class).buildDescriptor();
>
> or
>
> AttributeDescriptorBuilder builder = new
> AttributeDescriptorBuilder(factory);
> builder.setName("location");
> builder.setTypeName("gml:PointPropertyType");
> builder.setBinding(Point.class);
> AttributeDescriptor attribute = builder.buildDescriptor();
>
> Best regards,
>
> Roar Brænden
>
>
> 27. mai 2022 kl. 03:33 skrev Jody Garnett <jody.garn...@gmail.com>:
>
> I remember annoying cite test style problems where tests were checking
> that an attribute named "location" was required to be a PointPropertyType.
>
> OGC 07-036r1
>
> *Table 11*
> GML object element: gml:Point
>
> GML type: gml:PointType
>
> GML property type: gml:PointPropertyType
>
> *F.2.1.2.4 Default property types for gml object types*
>
> A default GML property type may be defined in a GML application schema for
> every GML object type defined in that GML application schema.
> The GML property type shall either use or inherit directly or indirectly
> from one of the property types specified in 7.2.3 or it shall be defined in
> accordance with the patterns specified in this subclause.
>
>
> Here is the simple feature logic in our codebase:
> -
> https://github.com/geotools/geotools/blob/main/modules/library/xml/src/main/java/org/geotools/gml/producer/FeatureTypeTransformer.java#L446
>
> And the annoying case of "location" property:
> -
> https://github.com/geotools/geotools/blob/main/modules/library/sample-data/src/main/resources/org/geotools/test-data/xml/gml/feature.xsd#L33
>
> --
> Jody Garnett
>
>
> On Thu, 26 May 2022 at 09:07, Andrea Aime <
> andrea.a...@geosolutionsgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm actually not sure we ever use the type name... just the descriptor
>> name.
>> I have faint memories about this, but I think the parallel was:
>> - descriptor is like an XML element name
>> - type is like the XML type backing the element
>>
>> They can have legitimately two different names, no? In theory the same
>> type could be shared across multiple descriptors
>> Don't think it happens with simple features, not sure if that's something
>> used by app-schema, it might if it's driven by an actual XML schema though?.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Andrea
>>
>> On Thu, May 26, 2022 at 5:49 PM Jody Garnett <jody.garn...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Please go ahead with the fix, now that GeoServer has the ability to
>>> redefine schema attributes (and I hope to add the ability to edit title /
>>> abstract) this information will be more widely used and relied on.
>>>
>>> Jody
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 25, 2022 at 11:32 PM Roar Brænden <roar.brenden...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi,
>>>>
>>>> I was reading some shapefiles when it came to my attention that
>>>> something was strange with the schema's reported:
>>>>
>>>> TS14_max identified extends
>>>> polygonFeature(the_geom:MultiPolygon,ID1:ID1,AV_Time:AV_Time,Shape_Leng:Shape_Leng,Shape_Area:Shape_Area)
>>>> TS21_min identified extends
>>>> polygonFeature(the_geom:MultiPolygon,ID1:ID1,AV_Time:AV_Time,Shape_Leng:Shape_Leng,Shape_Area:Shape_Area)
>>>> TS16_mc identified extends
>>>> polygonFeature(the_geom:MultiPolygon,ID1:ID1,AV_Time:AV_Time,Shape_Leng:Shape_Leng,Shape_Area:Shape_Area)
>>>>
>>>> The problem is why does it repeat the name of the fields. After some
>>>> digging in the code, I realized that the problem is within:
>>>> org.geotools.feature.AttributeTypeBuilder.buildDescriptor(String name)
>>>>
>>>> public AttributeDescriptor buildDescriptor(String name) {
>>>> setName(name); <---- name isn't the type's
>>>> name. It's the attributes name
>>>> if (binding == null)
>>>> throw new IllegalStateException("No binding has been
>>>> provided for this attribute");
>>>> if (crs != null || Geometry.class.isAssignableFrom(binding)) {
>>>> return buildDescriptor(name, buildGeometryType());
>>>> } else {
>>>> return buildDescriptor(name, buildType());
>>>> }
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> According to Github that code hasn't been changed for years, so
>>>> GeoTools users must have become familiar with this "problem". Because it
>>>> might not be a real problem. I do believe most people are using
>>>> getBinding() rather than looking at what is returned by getName() when
>>>> looking at an AttributeType.
>>>>
>>>> I'm quite sure removing that setName(name) line will fix the problem,
>>>> but doing so will possibly end up in a lot of unit test failures like this
>>>> one:
>>>>
>>>> [ERROR] ImageMosaicReaderTest.granuleSourceTest:1437
>>>> expected:<...ltiPolygon,location:[location,time:time,endtime:endtime,date:date,lowz:lowz,highz:highz,loww:loww,highw:highw])>
>>>> but
>>>> was:<...ltiPolygon,location:[String,time:Date,endtime:Date,date:String,lowz:Integer,highz:Integer,loww:Integer,highw:Integer])>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Should I go forward fixing this, or are people so used to this that
>>>> they don't bother?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Roar Brænden
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> GeoTools-Devel mailing list
>>>> GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>>>>
>>> --
>>> --
>>> Jody Garnett
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> GeoTools-Devel mailing list
>>> GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Regards,
>> Andrea Aime
>> ==
>> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts!
>> Visit http://bit.ly/gs-services-us for more information.
>> ==
>>
>> Ing. Andrea Aime
>> @geowolf
>> Technical Lead
>>
>> GeoSolutions Group
>> phone: +39 0584 962313
>> fax: +39 0584 1660272
>> mob: +39 333 8128928
>>
>> https://www.geosolutionsgroup.com/
>> http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
>> -------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg.
>> UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si
>> precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo
>> contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è
>> riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il
>> messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra
>> operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia.
>>
>> This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is
>> addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or
>> otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by
>> European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this
>> e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended
>> recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please
>> notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail
>>
>
> --
--
Jody Garnett
_______________________________________________
GeoTools-Devel mailing list
GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
