Hi,
I agree with Marco and Jürgen. We should still keep the plugin. OGR is
getting a lot better for reading dxf, but QGIS is not ready to digest
it. And the dxf2shp plugins can split it up to the different geometry
types. QGIS, on the other hand just randomly picks the first geometry
type it hits, other types are not accessible with the current QGIS OGR
file loader.
As Marco said, QGIS needs to be improved to properly handle dxf reading
through OGR, because OGR presents mixed geometries from a single source.
Also, QGIS needs to be able to properly handle OGR styling, OGR
labeling, block handling, etc.
My employer invested a couple thousand bucks on improving dxf reading
and writing in OGR, but now someone needs to come up with funding of the
QGIS part of the dxt reading/writing. The low level infrastructure in
OGR should more or less exist now.
Andreas
On Wed, 26 Jan 2011 09:13:25 +0100, Marco Hugentobler wrote:
Hi Paolo, Werner
Additionally to the version consideration, I'd suggest to keep the
plugin in
the source until we have sound feedback from a few dxf powerusers.
Because matching dxf to GIS is difficult (multilayers, labels,
different feature
types can be in one layer). So accessing dxf via OGR in QGIS might
not be as
trivial as it seems. E.g. in QGIS we expect all the features in one
layer to
be of the same shape type.
Regards,
Marco
Am Dienstag, 25. Januar 2011, um 20.14:16 schrieb Paolo Cavallini:
Hi all.
I checked today, and I saw that reading DXF through gdal 1.7 works
reasonably well. Wouldn't it be better then to drop the dxf2shape
plugin, who has no maintainer and a few bugs?
All the best.
--
--
Andreas Neumann
Böschacherstrasse 10A
8624 Grüt (Gossau ZH)
Switzerland
_______________________________________________
Qgis-developer mailing list
Qgis-developer@lists.osgeo.org
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
