Re: [cf-pointobsconvention] Draft 2

NOTE: The cf-pointobsconvention mailing list is no longer active. The list archives are made available for historical reasons.

Hello All,

I'd like to suggest a somewhat different approach - what about storing the geometries according to OGC's Simple Feature Specification (http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/sfa)?
As many of you know, this a way of representing points, lines (profiles, 
trajectories), and polygons that has gained wide acceptance w/in the GIS 
community.  These geometries could be stored in OGC's Well-Known Binary 
format for which there is again wide-spread support (Java Topology 
Suite, GEOS, PostGIS, Oracle Spatial, etc.)
Perhaps an dimension of geometries could be stored that could be 
referenced by the records in a many-to-one manner?  Clients accessing 
the data via the CDM would be unaware of the storage specifics and would 
see only scientific data types while those accessing the netcdf file 
directly would have access to the WKB blobs and have established 
libraries to deal w/ them.
I admit to being vague as to the specifics of storing "blobs" of binary 
data w/in the netcdf file and associating them w/ records, but it seems 
similar to the parent-child table concept put forward in Draft 2.
-- john


  • 2007 messages navigation, sorted by:
    1. Thread
    2. Subject
    3. Author
    4. Date
    5. ↑ Table Of Contents
  • Search the cf-pointobsconvention archives: