Puneet:
I believe you've just described the SDF format (open, based on SQL
lite) that is currently in use by FDO / MapGuide.
Some info from a post from Jason Birch a while back:
To bring us back to the start of this post, the one item on this
list that I think may get overlooked is
Puneet,
You wrote: Is this too crazy?
I don't think this idea is crazy at all. In fact, I think it is a very
good idea. I do have a couple of comments, which you can read below:
You wrote: What if we came up with a new and improved data format --
call it
Open Shapefile (extension .osh)...
I
this sounds like the SDF format, although I am not sure that SDF is
open source - there is an open source implementation as part of FDO (http://fdo.osgeo.org/fdosdf/index.html
)
Paul
On 13-Nov-07, at 9:52 AM, P Kishor wrote:
So, I am thinking, Shapefile is the de facto data standard for
On Tue, Nov 13, 2007 at 07:42:12AM -0800, Landon Blake wrote:
You wrote: that would be completely Free,
single-file based (instead of the multiple .shp, .dbf, .shx, etc...
Is there a problem with a multiple file format? I have tinkered with
some different binary file formats, and it seems
Thanks everyone, for responding. Here is my groundwork.
The new format --
- Should be fast. SQLite is plenty fast, and anything that simply
extends the Shapefile format to inject relational capabilities
should be pretty fast. It should definitely be faster than a
geodatabase format (such as
Puneet,
You wrote: Should be easy to transition to. By building the new format
on the
structure of the Shapefile format, and *in fact*, calling it open
shapefiles or some such thing, we indicate from its name that the
transition is not that revolutionary but is evolutionary. This,
hopefully, will
On Nov 13, 2007, at 6:42 AM, Frank Warmerdam wrote:
o RDBMS style operations like SQL filtering, joins, etc.
o Get past all the shapefile limitations related to the .dbf format
(very
restricted data types, short attribute names, lots of other limits)
o Allow storing many layers in one
Landon wrote:
---
I really think you are going to run into problems using the Shapefile
as part of the trademark or name for any product not sold by ESRI. I
strongly recommend against this move.
---
I'm not a lawyer, but I really doubt that shapefile is unique enough to
be
On 11/13/07, Frank Warmerdam [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
P Kishor wrote:
So, I am thinking, Shapefile is the de facto data standard for GIS
data. That it is open (albeit not Free) along with the deep and wide
presence of ESRI's products from the beginning of the epoch, it has
been widely
David,
On 11/13/07, David William Bitner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Part of the mission of the OSGeo Geodata committee
(http://www.osgeo.org/geodata) is to promote the use of open geospatial
formats. If there is a group that wants to continue pursuing the creation
of a new open geodata
I have created a (now empty) space on the OSGeo wiki to start to fill in
concrete details that come out of this discussion at
http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/Geodata_formats. Please use the wiki to put
your wishlists for a new open data format, lists of existing data formats
with links to their
From: P Kishor [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [OSGeo-Discuss] idea for an OSGeo project -- a new, open
data format
To: OSGeo Discussions discuss@lists.osgeo.org
Message-ID:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 11/13/07, Frank Warmerdam
This is to announce that work has begun on what is being named the
OSGeo4W installer. To keep this announcement email short, please see
its Wiki page for more installer details
(http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/OSGeo_Win32_Installer). Also, a new
mailing list has been created, osgeo4w-dev (join
Jeff McKenna wrote:
This is to announce that work has begun on what is being named the
OSGeo4W installer. To keep this announcement email short, please see
its Wiki page for more installer details
(http://wiki.osgeo.org/index.php/OSGeo_Win32_Installer). Also, a new
mailing list has been
14 matches
Mail list logo
