Hi Chris,
That would be excellent. I think the parsing of complex features
will be needed in what ever approach is taken for the mapping.
Andy
On 07/01/2011 14:02, Chris Holmes wrote:
Nope, it hasn't. I can get you in touch with the guys
Nope, it hasn't. I can get you in touch with the guys who wrote it, maybe
if you have a bit of funding they can clean it up and contribute it. Though
I know they intend to, they just haven't found the time. People expressing
interest like this will probably help them, especially if you're
Note there are some developers who have built support for parsing complex
GML features. They just haven't got the go ahead and time to contribute the
code back. Though I'm meeting them today, so will mention that there is
real community interest.
On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 9:08 PM, Ben
Hi Ben,
Many thanks for that. Sounds like there's quite a few obstacles at
the moment. I feel that whatever mapping solution is eventually
used to implement transactions, it should *ideally* be also used to
deliver the complex features in the read direction. Given
Hi All,
We were just sizing up the task of enabling transactions with the
app-schema plugin, and were wondering if anyone knew of any major issues
which might prevent / trouble the development of this? Questions which
immediately come to mind are:
1) Would the current mappings be re-usable,
I'm not an app schema expert, but I'm pretty sure it's a lot more involved
than just reusing current mappings.
I know of one group that's done transactions against app schema stuff, but
I'm pretty sure they just did transactions against the underlying flat
schemas. It'd be relatively easy to set
