[GeoJSON] GeoJSON Digest, Vol 64, Issue 3

[Howard Butler]

On Apr 3, 2014, at 1:41 PM, Jeff Yutzler <jeffy at imagemattersllc.com> wrote:

> Howard,
> > strong case about why it is in scope for GeoJSON
> Some stuff changes its geometry over time and I want a consistent/interoperable way to encode that.

A quick google showed Ron talking about time in GML [1]. Was that what was implemented? Has it been successful? Has it been widely used and supported? Has history shown the approach to be deficient in any serious way? Is a simple JSON encoding of that approach sufficient?

> 
> > to place the burden of it on all implementors of GeoJSON
> I don't want to burden anyone either which is why I support a core/extensions model. If you guys aren't willing to entertain that then this is probably the wrong forum.

So what to do about time as a blessed extension, rather than a core feature, correct?

> 
> > already done, widely accepted, and frequently implemented and say "use that"
> I am not aware of anything that does for "when" what GeoJSON does for "where" nor am I aware of any initiative that is on the right path to doing so.

Is there a right path, or is it a matter of just settling on something and pointing people to use it?


On Apr 3, 2014, at 1:49 PM, Martin Daly <Martin.Daly at cadcorp.com> wrote:

> I'm not against adding time per se, but I don't like the precedent being "Yes" instead of "No". That way lies GML 3.

I agree that this default stance has served GeoJSON rather well. We had multiple opportunities to "fix" GeoJSON just as its adoption was sweeping up, probably toasting the ecosystem's interop in the process, and I think it's been a good thing that we've been obstinate. We all bitch about shapefile, but the property of it never really being able to change was a stabilizing force that allowed the previous generation to sprout, despite its obvious deficiencies. GeoTIFF too. All three beg the question of whether or not "don't break it" actually means "don't ever change". I don't know the answer to that, but history is instructive.

[1] http://www.galdosinc.com/archives/151