asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Carey <dtab...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ASTERIXDB-1371: Support the standard GIS objects
Date Wed, 10 May 2017 14:11:37 GMT
I will leave it to the official GSC mentor (who's also a leading expert 
on big spatial data) to direct - I was just suggesting that step 0 
should be to become familiar with what's already there currently, to 
have a working knowledge of that as background.

:-)

Looking forward to seeing this project unfold!

Cheers,

Mike


On 5/9/17 10:14 PM, Riyafa Abdul Hameed wrote:
> Hi,
>
> As I understand by playing with current support of GIS objects( point,
> polygon, circle, and rectangle) is similar to the Well known text
> format--correct me if I am mistaken. Hence initially we could support other
> GIS objects in WKT and support GeoJSON if time permits.
>
> Thank you.
> Yours sincerely,
> Riyafa
>
> On 8 May 2017 at 23:31, Mike Carey <dtabass@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I would also suggest playing with the current geo support in AsterixDB
>> (curretn types and indexing and functions in queries) to get warmed up.
>> Welcome aboard...!!
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>> On 5/8/17 8:51 AM, Riyafa Abdul Hameed wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I have been selected to contribute to the issue ASTERIXDB-1371
>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ASTERIXDB-1371> for GSoC this
>>> time.
>>> This being the community bonding period I am trying to familiarize myself
>>> with the code base of AsterixDB and to get a grasp of the task.
>>>
>>> I am under the impression that the package *org.apache.asterix.om
>>> <http://org.apache.asterix.om> *has the classes for handling data models
>>> for AsterixDB and have been looking into them to figure out the
>>> implementation details. Please correct me if I am mistaken.
>>>
>>> I have also been reading on the specification for well known text[1] and
>>> GeoJSON[2] and have been trying to figure out if implementing one of them
>>> would suffice (if so which one) or if both needs to be implemented. If
>>> both
>>> needs to be implemented we should decide which needs to be implemented
>>> first. I was thinking of going for GeoJSON as it seems to have a wider
>>> usage.
>>>
>>> Any suggestions on how I should proceed with the project would be highly
>>> valued.
>>>
>>> [1] http://docs.opengeospatial.org/is/12-063r5/12-063r5.html
>>> [2] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7946
>>>
>>> Thank you.
>>>
>>> Yours sincerely,
>>> Riyafa
>>>
>>>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message