Even,
agreed. I guess I have become rather too embedded in Oracle these
days: any SQL method that supports blobs should provide the same. The
bigger issue would be for those methods that cannot support blobs, arrays,
etc, where this wkt would be pretty much the only viable alternative.
Bes
Le jeudi 28 janvier 2016 09:58:06, Peter Halls a écrit :
> Ari, Even,
>
> one potential solution where M data are present but not supported by
> the Geometry type would be to add M as a user defined attribute, as is done
> for Z values in some drivers / packages. This preserves both the geo
Ari, Even,
one potential solution where M data are present but not supported by
the Geometry type would be to add M as a user defined attribute, as is done
for Z values in some drivers / packages. This preserves both the geometry
integrity and the data. Should the user wish to 'upgrade' th
Le jeudi 28 janvier 2016 09:23:47, Ari Jolma a écrit :
> 28.01.2016, 00:05, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
>
> Thanks for the pointer to the geometry codes in SF Common Architecture,
> somehow I overlooked it.
>
> > my point with adding the new capabilities was that drivers that
> > wouldn't advertize t
28.01.2016, 00:05, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
Thanks for the pointer to the geometry codes in SF Common Architecture,
somehow I overlooked it.
my point with adding the new capabilities was that drivers that
wouldn't advertize the M capabilities would never see a M or ZM
geometry / geometry type
>
> BTW, where can I find a comprehensive list of the wkb types? There is an
> old ISO SQL/MM Part 3 pdf in the web but it is old and seems to be
> incorrect too. libspatialite has a header file that has many but not all
> that ogr_core.h has.
I see I had linked
https://github.com/postgis/postgis
27.01.2016, 18:26, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 16:48:45, Ari Jolma a écrit :
The draft RFC is here
https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc61
Changed to
https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc61_support_for_measured_geometries
My remarks:
1) #define OGR_G_
--> shoul
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 16:48:45, Ari Jolma a écrit :
> The draft RFC is here
>
> https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc61
My remarks:
1) #define OGR_G_
--> should that be rather (since the intent seems to be bitwise combination):
#define OGR_G_NOT_EMPTY 0x1
#define OGR_G_3D
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 16:48:45, Ari Jolma a écrit :
> https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc61
Similarly to other RFCs, would you mind changing the URL to something more
descriptive like
https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc61_measured_geometries ?
--
Spatialys - Geospatial professional ser
The draft RFC is here
https://trac.osgeo.org/gdal/wiki/rfc61
Ari
27.01.2016, 15:52, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 14:38:05, Ari Jolma a écrit :
27.01.2016, 15:23, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 14:01:42, Ari Jolma a écrit :
27.01.2016, 14:34, Ari J
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 14:38:05, Ari Jolma a écrit :
> 27.01.2016, 15:23, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
> > Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 14:01:42, Ari Jolma a écrit :
> >> 27.01.2016, 14:34, Ari Jolma kirjoitti:
> >>> 27.01.2016, 13:27, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
> Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 11:55
27.01.2016, 15:23, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 14:01:42, Ari Jolma a écrit :
27.01.2016, 14:34, Ari Jolma kirjoitti:
27.01.2016, 13:27, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 11:55:01, Ari Jolma a écrit :
Folks,
I'd like to try to implement the XYZM suppo
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 14:01:42, Ari Jolma a écrit :
> 27.01.2016, 14:34, Ari Jolma kirjoitti:
> > 27.01.2016, 13:27, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
> >> Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 11:55:01, Ari Jolma a écrit :
> >>> Folks,
> >>>
> >>> I'd like to try to implement the XYZM support since I have some
27.01.2016, 14:34, Ari Jolma kirjoitti:
27.01.2016, 13:27, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 11:55:01, Ari Jolma a écrit :
Folks,
I'd like to try to implement the XYZM support since I have some free
time.
Before making a RFC, there are some thoughts/questions/ideas:
* I m
27.01.2016, 13:27, Even Rouault kirjoitti:
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 11:55:01, Ari Jolma a écrit :
Folks,
I'd like to try to implement the XYZM support since I have some free time.
Before making a RFC, there are some thoughts/questions/ideas:
* I made a fork for this work at https://github.
Ari,
I do not think that Z and M can ever be truly synonymous: whilst z is
partially defined in terms of, for example, a datum, there is no equivalent
for M. Also, by convention, X, Y and Z frequently employ the same units;
there is no equivalent convention for M (as yet).
There may be
Le mercredi 27 janvier 2016 11:55:01, Ari Jolma a écrit :
> Folks,
>
> I'd like to try to implement the XYZM support since I have some free time.
>
> Before making a RFC, there are some thoughts/questions/ideas:
>
> * I made a fork for this work at https://github.com/ajolma/GDAL-XYZM so
> I can
Folks,
I'd like to try to implement the XYZM support since I have some free time.
Before making a RFC, there are some thoughts/questions/ideas:
* I made a fork for this work at https://github.com/ajolma/GDAL-XYZM so
I can more easily use travis.
* I think this is mainly changes in the geomet
18 matches
Mail list logo
