Ben Caradoc-Davies ha scritto: > +1. This make sense, and will allow more flexible use of this class. > > There is one slight implementation complication: app-schema allows > multiple definition of feature types, to allow nested (feature chained) > types to used in different ways for different properties. Our > interpretation of the new removeSchema API (if we ever have one) will > likely be to honour it only for top-level types. This does not change > the merit of your proposal.
Removing only top level seems to make sense to me. Just to make sure, when you answer getTypeNames(), you do return only the top levels? I believe there should be some consistency between getTypeNames(), getFeatureSource() and removeSchema() Cheers Andrea -- Andrea Aime OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Expert service straight from the developers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
