I agree that Oracle's syntax is the most friendly. On the other hand, since I don't see somebody packing more than 2 or 3 operators, the proposed syntax is not that bad, like:
SetRelateMask(FdoSpatialOperations_Crosses | FdoSpatialOperations_Touches);
And I think it's way, way more user friendly than those terrible DE-9IM strings :-)
Dan.
-----Original Message-----
From:
[hidden email] [mailto:
[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
Sent: Wednesday, July 15, 2009 12:13 PM
To: FDO Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [fdo-internals] Please review FDO RFC 39 - Spatial operator combinations support
given the user friendly nature of the oracle syntax, is it worth supporting
that syntax as well, it makes for more readable code than bit packing?
z
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 11:04 PM, Orest
Halustchak<
[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi,
>
>
>
> Here is another proposed enhancement to FDO expressions. We've had requests
> to handle the more general Relate spatial operator as defined by OGC.
>
>
>
> RFC 39, drafted by Dan Stoica, adds to the list of spatial operators for
> FDO. The Relate operator is a bit more complex than the others due to the
> requirement of an additional operator mask parameter. The RFC also includes
> a reference to the OGC spec that includes a definition of the operator and
> the related mask.
>
>
>
>
http://trac.osgeo.org/fdo/wiki/FDORfc39>
>
>
> Have a look at the RFC and provide your comments.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Orest.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> fdo-internals mailing list
>
[hidden email]
>
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals>
>
--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com+61 405 847 168
_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals_______________________________________________
fdo-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/fdo-internals
