[GeoJSON] AsJSON(geometry)

[Sean Gillies]

Chris Holmes wrote:
> 
> 
> Sean Gillies wrote:
>> Chris Holmes wrote:
>>>  >>> I think that's needlessly fluffy. Once you know the typology,
>>>  >>> you can deal with anonymous arrays-of-arrays perfectly well.
>>>  >>
>>>  >> I agree and prefer:
>>>  >>
>>>  >>     {"multipoint": "[[x00 y00], [x11 y11], ..., [xNN yNN]]"}
>>>  >>
>>>
>>>  > This was my initial feeling too. But I've already got objects in hand
>>>  > with point members on the Python side of my application, and I'd 
>>> like  > an object or hash-oriented interface on the javascript side 
>>> as well.
>>>  > Why should I pack them into anonymous arrays just to unpack them 
>>> again > at the other end?
>>>
>>> I'm a bit more on the object approach as well.  I think it's a bit 
>>> more human readable, without really all that much fluff in the big 
>>> picture.
>>>
>>> A very small multi-polygon ends up something like this:
>>>
>>> [[[[10,10][10,20][20,20][20,15][10,10]]][[[10,10][10,20][20,20][20,15][10,10]][[11,11][11,12][12,12][11,11]]]] 
>>> (two polygons, one just exterior, one with an exterior and an interior)
>>>
>>> Also looking at OpenLayer's svn: 
>>> http://svn.openlayers.org/trunk/openlayers/lib/OpenLayers/Geometry/
>>>
>>> there is a geometry object model, and I think it'd make sense to just 
>>> dump in to something like that.
>>>
>>> I'm also +1 on rolling in geometryType and spatialCoordinates in to one.
>>>
>>> Chris
>>>
>>
>> My preference for
>>
>>    {"type": "point", "value": [x1, x2, x3]}
>>
>> over
>>
>>    {"point": [x1, x2, x3]}
>>
>> is that geometry handling code can switch() on the value of "type" for 
>> the former. The latter looks more concise, but is less convenient to 
>> handle, requiring if/else or try/catch. IMO, a good geo-JSON should be 
>> ridiculously easy to use, even if it means being a bit fluffy.
> 
> That is a good reason, and I can support that.  But what would you think 
> of having both in a 'geometry' object, instead of at the same level in a 
> feature.
> 
> Like:
> 
>  { "id": "alesia",
>       "title": "Alesia",
>       "classname": "settlement",
>       "geometry": {
>        "type": "point",
>        "value": [47.535, 4.478, 0.0]
>       }
>       "srs": "EPSG:4326",
>     }
> 
> instead of
> 
>  { "id": "alesia",
>       "title": "Alesia",
>       "classname": "settlement",
>       "geometryType": "point",
>       "spatialCoordinates": [[47.535, 4.478, 0.0]],
>       "srs": "EPSG:4326",
>     }
> 
> ?
> 
> Chris
> 

I'm in favor of the above.

Sean