Talk:Geography Markup Language
This reference (GDF) does not really belong here. While the other references are actually about GML, this is only a peripheral reference [this comment moved from page content into talk] —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 188.8.131.52 (talk • contribs) 2006-01-23 05:44:58 (UTC)
Mergefrom Cgml and GML Application Schemas
I'm suggesting that these should be merged into this article as they are currently stubs that seem to only be relavent to this article (they are only linked from here). If these stub articles gain some real content here, they can always be moved back out. – Doug Bell talk•contrib 22:37, 17 March 2006 (UTC)
Not happy about merging Application Schemas page. The topic of application schemas is the always neglected corollary of the GML framework. It usually gets buried in the GML encoding swamp, and that is effectively where you have pushed it again. Yes, the GML Application Schemas page was a stub, but an important statement of intention. Furthermore, in merging, the one link to a publicly available application schema (GeoSciML - https://www.seegrid.csiro.au/twiki/bin/view/CGIModel/GeoSciML) has been lost! Just because no-one else appears to be willing to tell the world about their community, you shouldn't suppress information previously provided. Not happy at all.
I would be grateful if you would revert this change and re-instate the GML Application Schemas page - my Wikipedia skills are unfortunately not up to this, and I can;t find the page any more. dr_shorthair 03:39, 3 May 2006 (UTC) a
Incosistent usage of the srsDimension attribute
The srsDimension attribute is used incosistently in the samples. Its first usage is:
<gml:Point gml:id="p21" srsName="urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG:6.6:4326"> <gml:pos dimension="2">45.67 88.56</gml:pos> </gml:Point>
where dimension is an attribute of the gml:pos element; and then in the sample for the Point Profile, we see:
<position> <gml:Point srsDimension="2" srsName="urn:ogc:def:crs:EPSG:6.6:4326"> <gml:pos>49.40 -123.26</gml:pos> </gml:Point> </position>
where srsDimension is an attribute of the gml:Point element. I believe this is the correct one.
CRS in GeoRSS
Untrue to suggest that GeoRSS is restricted to a single coordinate system. True that GeoRSS will default to WGS-84 if no SRS is supplied, but it can definitely support other coordinate reference systems when they are supplied - in fact, GeoRSS supports GML in addition to W3C Geo tags and Simple lat/long tags. DruidSmith (talk) 06:18, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Examples Latitude vs. Longitude
I would like to see the examples where the Longitude is greater than +/-90 so that people can quick reference the page to get the lat/lon order correct. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mrdvt92 (talk • contribs) 22:53, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
Features using geometries Example
In the example 'Features using geometries' one property of the <abc:Building gml:id="SearsTower"> feature is:
<app:extent> <gml:Polygon> <gml:exterior> <gml:LinearRing> <gml:coordinates>100,200</gml:coordinates> </gml:LinearRing> </gml:exterior> </gml:Polygon> </app:extent>
I trying to learn, so my understanding of the concepts may not be accurate. Wouldn't the geometry object <gml:Polygon> require that it consist of at least four coordinate pairs (at least a triangle) in the gml element <gml:coordinates></gml:coordinates> with the beginning and ending coordinate pair being identical to 'close' or complete the polygon?
For example: <gml:coordinates>0,0 100,0 100,100 0,100 0,0</gml:coordinates>
It seems as written that the extent of the feature building is a single point.
The argument of introducing gml:point because it allows XML DOM access falls short. gml:point does not give separate DOM access to each coordinate since coordinates are still stored in a single string. --Bmaisonny (talk) 17:05, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
Simple Features Profile
in the general GML model, arbitrary nesting of features and feature properties is not permitted
Seeing as GML is an ISO Standard, I don't see any benefit from having two separate articles about the same format, even if there are subtle differences in pre-ISO to post. +mt 19:07, 21 March 2011 (UTC)