te:
> > Hi,
> >
> > As a user, I really hope you can keep the software as simple to use as it
> > is nowadays even if the feature model goes complex...
> >
> > -Jukka Rahkonen-
> >
> > ____________________
> >
> > Lähettäjä: [EMAIL PROTECTED] puolesta: Mark
gt; nowadays even if the feature model goes complex...
>
> -Jukka Rahkonen-
>
>
>
> Lähettäjä: [EMAIL PROTECTED] puolesta: Markus Müller
> Lähetetty: pe 8.6.2007 19:04
> Vastaanottaja: List for discussion of JPP development and use.
> Ai
discussion of JPP development and use.
Aihe: Re: [JPP-Devel] Alternative to a complex feature model...
Hi Landon, Martin,
(as so often) I agree with most points made by Martin. Perhaps a use
case that I have in mind for a while is of interest here.
In Germany (sorry...) there is a group of people
Hi Landon, Martin,
(as so often) I agree with most points made by Martin. Perhaps a use
case that I have in mind for a while is of interest here.
In Germany (sorry...) there is a group of people who developed an
object model for urban planning called "XPlanGML" (for those able to
understand G
SS,
Good blog post.
It seems to me that you are recapitulating the object-vs-relational
debate that was raging strongly in the DB world in the late 90's. It
seems like the RDB's have won that round (at least for the time being)
on the server side, but the object world is obviously in the asc
I put up a post on my OpenJUMP blog about one possible alternative to
a complex feature model.
I haven't thought the idea through completely, and I don't have any
plans on implementing the alternative described, but if you are
interested in having the benefits of a more complex feature model in
Op
