On Jul 25, 2010, at 6:20 PM, Mateusz Loskot wrote: > Sounds good to me. > > A variation of this could be to physically separate responsibilities. > By default, I/O operation could be performed on raw data, without any > interpretation. Interpretation is left to user. > User has liberty to choose to use point interpreter provided by libLAS > or to implement his own.
One then asks, what's the point of libLAS then? ;) > > A point interpreter could be passed to reader for better, seamless > integration. I like the idea of an interpreter being applied to a reader. My schema idea is really a schema (layout) + interpreter. I hadn't described the distinction between the two in my description of the schema stuff. _______________________________________________ Liblas-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/liblas-devel
