Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Missing AbstractDescription #22

Open
denevers opened this issue Jun 25, 2019 · 0 comments
Open

Missing AbstractDescription #22

denevers opened this issue Jun 25, 2019 · 0 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@denevers
Copy link
Contributor

The first topic is missing AbstractDescription for some classes in Extension package. The role of those AbstractDescription classes is described in

https://docs.opengeospatial.org/is/16-008/16-008.html#7

But when we created those AbstractDescription, we did them by pulling properties from existing classes and push some other classes altogether in Extension. For those latter classes, we did not bother to create AbstractDescription (because it was the mechanism to push their properties in Extension while remaining in Basic package). This is where we neglected the second role of AbstractDescription: extension points to add more properties. GTK (Finland) spotted the problem when they wanted to create new properties for Fracture.

Check Fracture, Fold System, Lineation and Non-Directional Structure in https://docs.opengeospatial.org/is/16-008/16-008.html#186

There are a couple of solutions

  1. Move Fracture and Join to basic and add AbstractDescription (major, not bacward compatible for Extension pattern)
  2. Add AbstractDescription in Extension as point of extension (minor -if AbstractDescription is 0..n)
  3. Add a top level AbstractDescription to GeologicStructure (all class inherits it, minor but some classes get two AbstractDescription)

Solution 2 was preferred from the people attending the meeting, but someone rose a need for #1 (more classes into Basic). But solution #1 is not backward compatible. Unless there is a strong use case for #1, the general preference is to go with #2.

Is there disagreement ?

@denevers denevers added the enhancement New feature or request label Jun 25, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant