On 27 March 2014 16:08, Even Rouault <[email protected]> wrote: > Selon Ivan Lucena <[email protected]>: > >> Hi there, >> >> That is a great discussion and I applause Evens efforts and all the >> contributions, so but don't get me wrong by asking that: >> >> What do we want to accomplish with that class hierarchy? >> >> Will GDAL 2.0 be able to do thinks like: >> >> $ gdalinfo <dataset> >> >> And the proposed classes will be able to figure out what kind of dataset is >> that? > > Well, I've completely dropped off the idea of the complex schema of classes. > This was just to make people afraid and comment, and have fun myself with UML > schemas ;-) But the ultimate goal remains to have a GDALDataset object that > handle both raster bands and vectors. So yes an upgraded gdalinfo could > potentially handle any of the below datasets. However I'm not sure of what we > want to do with the current utilities. For example if you combine both > gdal_translate and ogr2ogr in a single utility, it will have like hundred of > options...
Or, make it similarly to git (or PDAL) gdal raster info f.tif gdal vector info f.shp :) Best regards, -- Mateusz Łoskot, http://mateusz.loskot.net _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
