[Gfoss] Fwd: [gdal-dev] UFO format / GDAL 3.0
aperi2007 a gmail.com
Mer 1 Apr 2015 18:13:06 CEST
Molto interessante davvero.
Se va in porto apre scenari importanti per l'interoperabilità.
Il 01/apr/2015 17:48 "Luca Delucchi" <lucadeluge a gmail.com> ha scritto:
> Per chi non legge la mailing list gdal-dev una buona notizia per il
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Even Rouault <even.rouault a spatialys.com>
> Date: 1 April 2015 at 14:16
> Subject: [gdal-dev] UFO format / GDAL 3.0
> To: gdal-dev a lists.osgeo.org
> Since some time a few ideas came to my mind and I felt today was a good
> one to
> share them and get feedback.
> Considering the never ending proliferation of GIS file formats, currently
> handled in GDAL trunk, it seems wise to put an end to it. Especially since
> counter used to iterate over the drivers is a unsigned 8 bit, so we will
> be unable to add more, or at the expense of sacrificing our ports to Intel
> or Motorola 6800, which would be pretty sad.
> Therefore I'd like to propose the UFO format, which stands for Universal
> Format Oh-yeaaah!
> The basic idea of UFO is that it isn't a fixed format, but a varying and
> described one. XML (or perhaps EXI?) + XSD + XSLT + XPath + Schematron
> probably do it, but for efficiency I thought to a byte-code interpreted by
> libgdal and whose interface with libgdal would match the GDAL driver
> interface. So basically each dataset would contain its own driver. The big
> plus is that you could write image translators that would generate binary
> encodings optimized for the particular dataset being encoded: for example,
> is kind of stupid to write the values of each pixel of a Mandelbrot fractal
> whereas its mathematical description fits into a few lines of code.
> Furthermore, still pursuing with that example, we could even have raster of
> arbitrary resolution, since that's a characteristics of fractals. And many
> datasets have indeed fractal charasterics, such as coastlines (
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coastline_paradox )
> For security reason, we should aim at supporting only simple & verifiable
> languages, so Brainfuck (Brainf**k for the most puritans of us) seems to
> be a
> good fit : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainfuck. Basically it is a
> complete language with only 8 commands. So as much powerful as needed,
> being very easy to learn and implement. To save some efforts, I'd humbly
> suggest we adopt libbf ( http://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/libbf ), an
> project of mine that also incorporates a on-the-fly optimizer & compiler
> most popular architectures.
> The plan would be to have an initial version of the UFO driver ready for
> 2.0 and push strongly for its widespread adoption in all GIS, remote
> OSS & proprietary vendors, etc.... Perhaps we should establish a dedicated
> workgroup at OGC to make it a standard ? Then we could deprecate and remove
> all existing drivers and at the time of GDAL 3.0, UFO would be the only one
> remaining driver, making the Intel 8008 port very happy!
> Happy to hear from your thoughts before formalizing that as a RFC,
> Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
> gdal-dev mailing list
> gdal-dev a lists.osgeo.org
> Gfoss a lists.gfoss.it
> Questa e' una lista di discussione pubblica aperta a tutti.
> I messaggi di questa lista non hanno relazione diretta con le posizioni
> dell'Associazione GFOSS.it.
> 750 iscritti al 18.3.2015
-------------- parte successiva --------------
Un allegato HTML è stato rimosso...
Maggiori informazioni sulla lista