Sunburned Surveyor wrote:
> David (and other OpenJUMP developers),
>
> I should add that the GeoTools folks did quickly respond to my inquiry
> on their mailing list about the Shapefile code. One of their developers
> mentioned that their are no current plans to Feature interface. They
> also
substantial benefit to Option 1 in
> terms of collaboration opportunities.
>
>
>
> David
>
>
> --
>
> *From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> ] *On Behalf Of *Sunburned Surveyor
> *Sent:* April 18, 2007 10:27 PM
> *To:* List for discussion of JPP development
tial benefit to Option 1 in
terms of collaboration opportunities.
David
--
*From:* [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Sunburned
Surveyor
*Sent:* April 18, 2007 10:27 PM
*To:* List for discussion of JPP development and use.
*Subject:* [JPP-Devel]
ption 1 in terms of collaboration opportunities.
David
_
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Sunburned Surveyor
Sent: April 18, 2007 10:27 PM
To: List for discussion of JPP development and use.
Subject: [JPP-Devel] Requesting some thoughts on GeoTools..
I've got a blog post up that talks about some challenges to collaboration
with GeoTools. I'd really like to get some input and suggestions from
others, including any of the GeoTools Project that keep an ear on this
mailing list.
I've also got a short post up on the Location Intelligence conferenc
