Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Migrated to Confluence 5.3

...

The coverage effort in GeoTools depends in large part on the development of ISO 19123 interfaces in the GeoAPI project. For each IWUG, there exists a corresponding GeoAPI and GeoTools Jira task. For the most part, ISO 19123 interfaces in GeoAPI's pending directory just need to be moved to the final package and modified to match the UML diagram. Martin has done an extensive commenting job which should be preserved as much as possible. However, at the time these interfaces were generated, "Record" and "RecordType" did not exist, nor did any of the NameSpace infrastructure. As such, finalizing the GeoAPI interfaces is largely a matter of updating the existing classes to match the UML diagram.

JIRA Issues
urlhttp://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?view=rss&&type=2&pid=10720&query=%22Coverage+IWUG%22&summary=true&description=true&tempMax=25&reset=true&decorator=none

...

The GeoTools implementation is taking place in the coverage_branch branch. This split off from trunk as a development branch last October. It is synchronized regularly with trunk to ease the eventual merging back into the main code base. The precise GeoTools version number at the time of this future merging is unknown. I am hesitant to venture a guess because the schedule has already slipped beyond what I was hoping for. (I got distracted by shiny Feature Models and didn't realize I'd have to implement things like Record and NameSpace along the way.)

JIRA Issues
urlhttp://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?view=rss&&type=2&pid=10270&query=%22Coverage+IWUG%22&summary=true&description=true&tempMax=25&reset=true&decorator=none

...