|
From: Jody G. <jga...@re...> - 2004-07-14 19:23:54
|
Jesse Eichar wrote: >> org.opengis.metadata.MetaData and Identification contains all methods >> found in org.geotools.metadata.iso19115. Concequently, the later >> could be removed. Key differences are: >> >> - org.opengis.metadata has no MetaDataElement interface, because I >> didn't found it in ISO 19115. However, we could add it if a >> request is send to the GeoAPI mailing list. > We needed to implement this in order to query against. (Cannot write a query api against bean properties, and still expect the same api to work against metadata xml documents). >> - Methods in MetaData and Identification returns the more accurate >> type instead of the generic MetaData[Element]. However, most >> method names are the same. > You may want to look at the use of reflection in the geotools Metadata class to see how both conditions can be met (easy java coding & metadata element for query). >> This also bring an other issue. There is already an >> org.geotools.metadata.MetaData class, which is a different beast than >> org.opengis.metadata.MetaData. In the approach I took up to now, all >> org.geotools.XXX classes are implementations of org.opengis.XXX >> interfaces (i.e. I just replace "opengis" by "geotools" in the fully >> qualified name). If we choose to continue that way, >> org.geotools.metadata.MetaData should be an implementation of >> org.opengis.metadata.MetaData. This means that current >> org.geotools.metadata.MetaData should be moved in an other package. >> Maybe some org.geotools.metadata subpackage? What do you think? > I think we are going to have more Metadata to implement then just ISO 19115 interfaces, dublin core was mentioned and for right now we need "off the cuff" metadata implementations for DataStore/GCE implementations of Catalog/CatalogEntry to work against. I was thinking of an abstract base class Metadata19115 implementing both interfaces that provides the required helper functions to make everything happy. Jody |