|
View:
New views
4 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
|
|
Spatial FunctionalityHi,
I responded to a recent post on the derby-user list on this topic. I am working on a project to add spatial functionality to Derby through user created tables and procedures. I am interested in taking the next step and looking at incorporating spatial functionality in Derby. The biggest issue I see is one of licensing. The concept of 'spatial datatypes' might seem simple enough, but there is no real point without spatial functions to go with them. The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) http://www.opengeospatial.org published a standard set of these, and there are a handful of high grade open source implementations. There is a huge amount of work in these implementations, and they rely on very specialized expertise. In the Java world there is just one that has stood the test of time, the JTS Topology Suite http://sourceforge.net/projects/jts-topo-suite/ . However JTS is LGPL, and the prospect of re-engineering the functionality just to get an Apache 2.0 license is mind boggling. Even worse, two of the OGC spatial filters (Distance Within and Beyond) require Coordinate Reference System (CRS) transformation if the database features are stored in a geographic CRS. The obvious choice for that functionality is Geotools http://geotools.codehaus.org/ , again LGPL. The Apache web site indicates there are unresolved questions about the compatibility of Apache 2.0 and GPL. Does anyone have more information on the status of LGPL? One alternative is to take the route that MySQL went. Leave out all the secondary filtering and just support Minimum Bounding Rectangle (MBR) queries. However the same question keeps surfacing on the MySQL spatial list with monotonous regularity: when will MySQL get 'real' spatial functionality. Personally I think a user-space solution is preferable to a half-way solution like MySQL. Regards, Peter |
|
|
Re: Spatial FunctionalityPeter Yuill wrote:
> Hi, > > I responded to a recent post on the derby-user list on this topic. I am > working on a project to add spatial functionality to Derby through user > created tables and procedures. I am interested in taking the next step > and looking at incorporating spatial functionality in Derby. > > The biggest issue I see is one of licensing. The concept of 'spatial > datatypes' might seem simple enough, but there is no real point without > spatial functions to go with them. The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) > http://www.opengeospatial.org published a standard set of these, and > there are a handful of high grade open source implementations. There is > a huge amount of work in these implementations, and they rely on very > specialized expertise. In the Java world there is just one that has > stood the test of time, the JTS Topology Suite > http://sourceforge.net/projects/jts-topo-suite/ . However JTS is LGPL, > and the prospect of re-engineering the functionality just to get an > Apache 2.0 license is mind boggling. Even worse, two of the OGC spatial > filters (Distance Within and Beyond) require Coordinate Reference System > (CRS) transformation if the database features are stored in a geographic > CRS. The obvious choice for that functionality is Geotools > http://geotools.codehaus.org/ , again LGPL. The Apache web site > indicates there are unresolved questions about the compatibility of > Apache 2.0 and GPL. Does anyone have more information on the status of > LGPL? > Thanks for working on this valuable contribution. We can ask the legal-discuss list for advice about the licensing issues. Do you know which version of the LGPL is used by the geospatial work? A quick glance at the Geo Tools website indicated LGPL without specifying which version. There are apparently two versions (2.1 and 3) according to the Free Software Foundation: http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#LGPL Thanks, -Rick > One alternative is to take the route that MySQL went. Leave out all the > secondary filtering and just support Minimum Bounding Rectangle (MBR) > queries. However the same question keeps surfacing on the MySQL spatial > list with monotonous regularity: when will MySQL get 'real' spatial > functionality. Personally I think a user-space solution is preferable to > a half-way solution like MySQL. > > Regards, > Peter > |
|
|
Re: Spatial FunctionalityHi Rick,
<Richard.Hillegas@...> said: > Peter Yuill wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I responded to a recent post on the derby-user list on this topic. I am > > working on a project to add spatial functionality to Derby through user > > created tables and procedures. I am interested in taking the next step > > and looking at incorporating spatial functionality in Derby. > > > > The biggest issue I see is one of licensing. The concept of 'spatial > > datatypes' might seem simple enough, but there is no real point without > > spatial functions to go with them. The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) > > http://www.opengeospatial.org published a standard set of these, and > > there are a handful of high grade open source implementations. There is > > a huge amount of work in these implementations, and they rely on very > > specialized expertise. In the Java world there is just one that has > > stood the test of time, the JTS Topology Suite > > http://sourceforge.net/projects/jts-topo-suite/ . However JTS is LGPL, > > and the prospect of re-engineering the functionality just to get an > > Apache 2.0 license is mind boggling. Even worse, two of the OGC spatial > > filters (Distance Within and Beyond) require Coordinate Reference System > > (CRS) transformation if the database features are stored in a geographic > > CRS. The obvious choice for that functionality is Geotools > > http://geotools.codehaus.org/ , again LGPL. The Apache web site > > indicates there are unresolved questions about the compatibility of > > Apache 2.0 and GPL. Does anyone have more information on the status of > > LGPL? > > > Hi Peter, > > Thanks for working on this valuable contribution. We can ask the > legal-discuss list for advice about the licensing issues. Do you know > which version of the LGPL is used by the geospatial work? A quick glance > at the Geo Tools website indicated LGPL without specifying which > version. There are apparently two versions (2.1 and 3) according to the > Free Software Foundation: > http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#LGPL Both Geotools and JTS use LGPL 2.1 > Thanks, > -Rick > > One alternative is to take the route that MySQL went. Leave out all the > > secondary filtering and just support Minimum Bounding Rectangle (MBR) > > queries. However the same question keeps surfacing on the MySQL spatial > > list with monotonous regularity: when will MySQL get 'real' spatial > > functionality. Personally I think a user-space solution is preferable to > > a half-way solution like MySQL. > > > > Regards, > > Peter > > > |
|
|
Re: Spatial FunctionalityHi Peter,
I asked the legal discussion list for advice on how to proceed. Ian Holsman, on the Lucene team, sent the following response. This may help you untangle the licensing issue. Please keep the Derby list informed so that we can help out as necessary. Patrick's email is "Patrick.OLeary@..." Thanks, -Rick Hi Rick. I'd like to introduce you to Patrick. the maintainer of local lucene. We're in the process of contributing locallucene http://www.nsshutdown.com/projects/lucene/whitepaper/locallucene.htm (waiting on some internal meetings with lawyers). One of the features they plan on adding is a ASL version of the geo spatial code. as they are also using the same library as you guys. I thought you two might like an introduction as your probably doing the same kind of thing. Regards Ian Peter Yuill wrote: > Hi Rick, > <Richard.Hillegas@...> said: > >> Peter Yuill wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I responded to a recent post on the derby-user list on this topic. I am >>> working on a project to add spatial functionality to Derby through user >>> created tables and procedures. I am interested in taking the next step >>> and looking at incorporating spatial functionality in Derby. >>> >>> The biggest issue I see is one of licensing. The concept of 'spatial >>> datatypes' might seem simple enough, but there is no real point without >>> spatial functions to go with them. The Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) >>> http://www.opengeospatial.org published a standard set of these, and >>> there are a handful of high grade open source implementations. There is >>> a huge amount of work in these implementations, and they rely on very >>> specialized expertise. In the Java world there is just one that has >>> stood the test of time, the JTS Topology Suite >>> http://sourceforge.net/projects/jts-topo-suite/ . However JTS is LGPL, >>> and the prospect of re-engineering the functionality just to get an >>> Apache 2.0 license is mind boggling. Even worse, two of the OGC spatial >>> filters (Distance Within and Beyond) require Coordinate Reference System >>> (CRS) transformation if the database features are stored in a geographic >>> CRS. The obvious choice for that functionality is Geotools >>> http://geotools.codehaus.org/ , again LGPL. The Apache web site >>> indicates there are unresolved questions about the compatibility of >>> Apache 2.0 and GPL. Does anyone have more information on the status of >>> LGPL? >>> >>> >> Hi Peter, >> >> Thanks for working on this valuable contribution. We can ask the >> legal-discuss list for advice about the licensing issues. Do you know >> which version of the LGPL is used by the geospatial work? A quick glance >> at the Geo Tools website indicated LGPL without specifying which >> version. There are apparently two versions (2.1 and 3) according to the >> Free Software Foundation: >> http://www.fsf.org/licensing/licenses/index_html#LGPL >> > > Both Geotools and JTS use LGPL 2.1 > > >> Thanks, >> -Rick >> >>> One alternative is to take the route that MySQL went. Leave out all the >>> secondary filtering and just support Minimum Bounding Rectangle (MBR) >>> queries. However the same question keeps surfacing on the MySQL spatial >>> list with monotonous regularity: when will MySQL get 'real' spatial >>> functionality. Personally I think a user-space solution is preferable to >>> a half-way solution like MySQL. >>> >>> Regards, >>> Peter >>> >>> |
| Free embeddable forum powered by Nabble | Forum Help |