Re: [Geotools-devel] Package for ordinary java.awt.Shape implementations?

[Martin D. <mar...@te...>]

Ian Turton wrote:
> I would prefer to keep org.geotools.geometry for a package that wraps 
> the JTS in an ISO19xxx compliment way, may be org.geotools.renderer.geom 
> would better?


Agree to not use org.geotools.geometry. After some though, it seems to 
me that org.geotools.renderer may be not so bad after all:

1) I have only one class to commit at this time (Arrow2D).

2) Current "org.geotools.renderer" already contains Shape
    implementation. "Polygon" and "Isoline" are such Shape,
    so Arrow2D would not be too different.

3) Unlike JTS or OpenGIS geometric objects, Java2D shapes like
    Arrow2D have no notion of coordinate system. Because of this
    we could say than from the Geotools point of view, Java2D shapes
    are more oriented toward rendering (not necessarly on Graphics2D)
    than geographic use. From this point of view, the renderer package
    make sense.

4) It may be a clear organization if subpackages are used only for
    different rendering target (e.g. Java2D, SWT, etc.). The only
    exception, org.geotools.renderer.array, is for private use and
    will be hiden from the javadoc.


	Martin.