[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
[udig-devel] Re: GO-1 implementation by Polexis
|
Thanks for starting this ball rolling Martin.
The idea of supporting a commercial rendering pipeline is appealing -
and indeed something we have designed for.
We are going to be on a very tight timeline for our next milestone (I
will send an update to the uDig list soon). What we have done in
response to the CRS changes/instability is delay our need for
reprojection until Milestone 3 (Mid October). This should bye the
geotools2 community several months of time, and allow us to keep the
pressure off.
The more immediate concern is closing the Geotools 2.0 development
branch and starting Geotools2.1. Chris Holmes has some commercial
developers from Australia that will also be working on the 2.1 branch.
So we will need to talk to James and make sure we can plan for a smooth
changeover.
From the standpoint of the uDig project we should be able to wrap the
GO-1 interfaces (and a Polexis renderer) for use. Please don't update
the lite renderer/ j2renderer on our account. Besides don't you need to
get your Geometry interfaces and JTS replacement first? The Go-1
interfaces are attractive though we should really talk schedule at one
of these geotools2 irc meetings.
One timeline with GO-1, GeoAPI, Geotools, GeoServer, uDig would go a
really long way.
Jody
Hello Greg, Jody and all
I send this email to both Refraction Research and Polexis peoples in
order to get you in touch.
A while ago, I proposed to Refraction Research to use GO-1 interfaces
for the renderer part and refactor Geotools J2D and lite-renderer
later as two implementations of those interfaces. However, I don't
know how long it will take to refactor those renderers, and I will
have some difficulties to work on them before a few months. In the
main time, there is one possible solution: Polexis, the compagny who
created the GO-1 specification, has an implementation backed by ESRI
product. If I'm understanding right, Polexis would be willing to make
this code available in Geotools (do I'm right Greg)? If so, then maybe
Refraction Research could use it as a GO-1 implementation for testing
purpose, and switch progressively to a pure Java implementation as
Geotools's renderer refactoring progress? Note that even in the long
term, a client may have valid reasons to want a renderer backed by
ESRI. Using GO-1 interfaces should allow us to switch renderers more
easily.
An implementation backed by a commercial product could not live in
Geotools's main module, but if I'm understanding right it could live
in one of 'ext' modules. What do you think?
Martin.
