Changes between Version 108 and Version 109 of WKTRaster/SpecificationWorking01


Ignore:
Timestamp:
01/22/10 02:49:04 (15 years ago)
Author:
mloskot
Comment:

Typos

Legend:

Unmodified
Added
Removed
Modified

  • WKTRaster/SpecificationWorking01

    v108 v109  
    633633
    634634----
    635 == '''The pros and cons of using GDAL VS implementing our own raster services''' ==
    636 
    637 A discussion is going on to find if we are better to use GDAL for most raster operations or if we should reimplement our own C raster functions them being based on GDAL algorythms or anything else. Here are the pros and cons of using GDAL:
     635== '''The pros and cons of using GDAL vs implementing our own raster services''' ==
     636
     637A discussion is going on to find if we are better to use GDAL for most raster operations or if we should reimplement our own C raster functions them being based on GDAL algorithms or anything else. Here are the pros and cons of using GDAL:
    638638
    639639'''Pros'''
    640640
    641  * We do not have to reinvent the whell for many WKT Raster functions (AsPolygon, AsRaster, AsJPEG, AsTIFF, AsPNG, etc...). This means a shorter WKT Raster development time.
     641 * We do not have to reinvent the wheel for many WKT Raster functions (AsPolygon, AsRaster, AsJPEG, AsTIFF, AsPNG, etc...). This means a shorter WKT Raster development time.
    642642
    643643 * We can contribute to GDAL by fixing bugs and sometime implement new features. Actually most new WKT Raster features (eg. ST_MapAlgebra()) could be implemented in GDAL by WKT Raster folks and then used by WKT Raster.