<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi, <br>
<br>
Thanks to the work of Jorge Piera they are really based on the ISO
19107:2003 [1], which "specifies conceptual schemas for describing
the spatial characteristics of geographic features". <br>
<br>
GML (ISO 19136:2007) [2] is a XML encoding compliant with the
previous ISO, so geometry types are similar to gvSIG's.<br>
<br>
Regards.<br>
<br>
[1]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=26012">http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=26012</a><br>
[2]
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=32554">http://www.iso.org/iso/iso_catalogue/catalogue_tc/catalogue_detail.htm?csnumber=32554</a><br>
<br>
El 06/06/13 17:26, Jordi Torres escribió:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAM4StfCstLcGo+eYJBtiYYep+PkG3Dmut7v9JOUTUt6-iHGJcQ@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>Hi Fran, <br>
<br>
</div>
That names are based in the GML specification AFAIK. <br>
<br>
</div>
Cheers. <br>
</div>
<div class="gmail_extra"><br>
<br>
<div class="gmail_quote">2013/6/6 Francisco Puga <span
dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:fpuga@cartolab.es" target="_blank">fpuga@cartolab.es</a>></span><br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi Cesar,<br>
<br>
There is any reason to choose that names, surface and so on,
instead<br>
the more common denominations?<br>
<br>
2013/6/6 Simon Cropper <<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:simoncropper@fossworkflowguides.com">simoncropper@fossworkflowguides.com</a>>:<br>
<div class="HOEnZb">
<div class="h5">> > Simon, would you be able to
share the shapefile with us so we can try<br>
> > to find what is happening?<br>
><br>
> I have I sent them to Joaquin del Cerro<br>
><br>
> On 06/06/13 19:43, Cèsar Ordiñana wrote:<br>
>> El 06/06/13 10:44, Simon Cropper escribió:<br>
>>> Jukka,<br>
>>><br>
>>> To be honest nor have I.<br>
>>><br>
>>> This is what is reported in the gvSIG layer
properties dialog.<br>
>><br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> The MultiSurface3D type is the gvSIG geometry
type name, not the Shape<br>
>> type name, as it is independent of the data
source type.<br>
>><br>
>> The relationship between gvSIG geometry types
and the shapefile ones is,<br>
>> more or less:<br>
>><br>
>> - Surface: Polygon<br>
>> - Curve: Polyline<br>
>> - Point: Point<br>
>> - 3D: Z<br>
>> - 2D: Nothing<br>
>><br>
>> We share the prefix "Multi" and when we add
support for geometries with<br>
>> "M" it will be added as a suffix also.<br>
>><br>
>> So a Shape of Polyline type should become a
Curve2D in gvSIG, a Shape of<br>
>> PolygonZ type must become a Surface3D, ... In
the case of a MultiPatch<br>
>> Shape, maybe it would become a MultiSurface2D
or MultiSurface3D, but I'm<br>
>> not sure if this is being taken into account in
the current code. Anyway<br>
>> I suppose this is not the case of Simon's shape
file, so it seems to me<br>
>> there is a bug in the information shown in the
layer properties dialog.<br>
>><br>
>> Simon, would you be able to share the shapefile
with us so we can try to<br>
>> find what is happening? If I understood you
well, the file is opened in<br>
>> gvSIG but the editing and geoprocessing tools
don't work with it. Is<br>
>> that so?<br>
>><br>
>> Regards.<br>
>><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Cèsar Ordiñana Navarro
gvSIG software architect
DiSiD Technologies (<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.disid.com">http://www.disid.com</a>)
</pre>
</body>
</html>