[georss] GeoRSS Simple Features Proposal

[Carl Reed]

If we do align with SF SQL, then there is consistency with numerous database 
implementations of that standard, such as in PostGIS, DB-2, SQLServer 2008, 
Oracle, and so forth.. There is, however, an ambiguity in SF SQL regarding 
CRS. For CRS, I would suggest we follow GML encoding rules.
Any questions about SF SQL, I am sure John Herring would be more than happy 
to help.

Carl


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Raj Singh" <raj at rajsingh.org>
To: "Joshua Lieberman" <josh at oklieb.net>
Cc: <georss at lists.eogeo.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 09, 2008 3:06 PM
Subject: Re: [georss] GeoRSS Simple Features Proposal


> Actually, this is a terminology problem. I'm trying to align not with
> GML Simple Features, but with the simpler:
> "OpenGIS Implementation Specification for Geographic information -
> Simple feature access - Part 2: SQL option"
> <http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/sfs>
>
> I just found these key clauses in that document.
>
> page 36:
> A conforming implementation shall support a subset of the following
> set of SQL Geometry Types: {Geometry, Point, Curve, LineString,
> Surface, Polygon, PolyhedralSurface, GeomCollection, MultiCurve,
> MultiLineString, MultiSurface, MultiPolygon, and MultiPoint}
>
> page 15:
> d) Polygons may contain holes, as described in the Geometry object
> model.
>
> ---
> Raj
>
>
> On Apr 9, 2008, at 4:38 PM, Joshua Lieberman wrote:
>> I did take a look at GML-SF. Holes are supported through gml:Polygon
>> or gml:Surface or gml:MultiSurface (MultiPolygon is depracated in GML
>> 3.2+). Basically, all of the compliance levels support the same set of
>> geometry types and place no more constraints on them than GML as a
>> whole does.
>>
>>
>> On Apr 9, 2008, at 3:59 PM, Raj Singh wrote:
>>
>>> My intention was just to match SF. If holes in polygons aren't part
>>> of
>>> SF we shouldn't add them. I'm also not completely sure what the use
>>> case for GeoRSS SF is (even though I posted the proposal). I feel
>>> I've
>>> heard a need for it, but I'd like to add some motivation behind it.
>>>
>>> Also, just turned comments on for that page.
>>> ---
>>> Raj
>>>
>>>
>>> On Apr 9, 2008, at 11:39 AM, Andrew Turner wrote:
>>>> On Wed, Apr 9, 2008 at 11:23 AM, Martin Daly
>>>> <Martin.Daly at cadcorp.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There is no restriction of course on putting a GML feature into
>>>>>> something like an Atom entry, either in the <Content> tag or just
>>>>>> intercalated, as an alternative or addition to a simpler GeorssGML
>>>>>> geometry. The CGDI Pilot also experimented with a
>>>>>> georss:FeatureofInterest element (analogous to O&M) to include a
>>>>>> full
>>>>>> (GML-SF0) feature in an Atom entry, in addition to the
>>>>>> georss:where
>>>>>> element.
>>>>
>>>> This seems entirely too complex. How is removing potential confusion
>>>> around GML-SF in where simplified by adding more arbitrary elements?
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Simple being simpler than simple is fine by me.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not even sure if they are disallowed at the moment in GeoRSS
>>>>> GML,
>>>>> but they are never mentioned.  They are disallowed in GeoRSS
>>>>> Simple, and
>>>>> the SF Proposal for GeoRSS Simple does not change this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Disallowing holes in Simple, but allowing them in GML (as is the
>>>>> case
>>>>> for GeometryCollection) seems like a reasonable compromise to me.
>>>>> I see
>>>>> no rationale in adding everything *except* holes to GML.
>>>>
>>>> I think that I agree with Martin - removing confusion by having a
>>>> GeoRSS specific GML profile seems good. Just make it synonymous with
>>>> GML-SF. So if someone want's really simple, then GeoRSS-Simple,
>>>> otherwise you have GML-SF.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> M
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> georss mailing list
>>>>> georss at lists.eogeo.org
>>>>> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -- 
>>>> Andrew Turner
>>>> mobile: 248.982.3609
>>>> andrew at mapufacture.com 42.2774N x 83.7611W
>>>> http://highearthorbit.com Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA
>>>>
>>>> http://mapufacture.com Helping build the Geospatial Web
>>>> Introduction to Neogeography - http://oreilly.com/catalog/
>>>> neogeography
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> georss mailing list
>>>> georss at lists.eogeo.org
>>>> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> georss mailing list
>>> georss at lists.eogeo.org
>>> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> georss mailing list
>> georss at lists.eogeo.org
>> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>
> _______________________________________________
> georss mailing list
> georss at lists.eogeo.org
> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss