[GeoJSON] RFC-001 vote
crschmidt at metacarta.com
Wed May 23 06:19:08 PDT 2007
On Wed, May 23, 2007 at 09:02:00AM -0400, Allan Doyle wrote:
> Note that there is a counterproposal in http://lists.geojson.org/
After working with GeoJSON long enough, I've realized that Tim is
absolutely right on the money with this:
"Again, I've heard the argument that you can cram much of your parser
into one line if you keep the coordinates array identical for 5 of the
geometries. Personally, I think this argument is a bit weak - and makes
the data structure overly funky."
I'm entirely in favor of:
* Getting rid of 'holes' (polygons are a list of rings, first one is
* Points being a tuple ([x,y])
* Lines being a list of tuples [[x,y], [x2,y2]]
* Polygons being a list of linear rings:
[[[x,y], [x2,y2], [x3,y3], [x,y]],[[x4,y4], [x5,y5], [x6,y6], [x4,y4]]]
I know I made the counter argument to begin with. It was stupid of me. I
learned better as I wrote more code.
So, I vote for doing whatever needs to be done to make Tim's suggestion 
the way things are done. If someone tells me the right way to proceed,
I'll turn what he wrote into a proposal on the wiki.
More information about the geojson