Closed ryanfranz closed 4 years ago
Will be discussed / reviewed at the CDB SWG meeting on 10 October 2019.
Thanks Carl for the review! Also, I am still figuring out how to do requirements and I didn't realize that I created a new class as well. I would classify this as a clarification to prevent interoperability issues, as the spec was silent about where these files should be located in the structure.
Ryan -
Good. Thanks for the clarification. The reason I asked is that the OAB may ask about the reason for two new requirements and related conformance classes to be added.
Regards
Carl
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:10 AM ryanfranz notifications@github.com wrote:
Thanks Carl for the review! Also, I am still figuring out how to do requirements and I didn't realize that I created a new class as well. I would classify this as a clarification to prevent interoperability issues, as the spec was silent about where these files should be located in the structure.
— You are receiving this because your review was requested. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/opengeospatial/cdb-volume-1/pull/3?email_source=notifications&email_token=ADF4ZK3YG7QLSSXEUVI7YJLQNX66LA5CNFSM4I6KLE32YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOEAYNRRI#issuecomment-540072133, or mute the thread https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADF4ZK6TRXNVSAX2M4IB5DDQNX66LANCNFSM4I6KLE3Q .
-- Carl Reed, PhD Carl Reed and Associates
Mobile: 970-402-0284
“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”
"I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend"
— Thomas Jefferson, U.S. Founding Father
Reviewed the CR commits by Ryan and the editiorial review by Carl prior to CDB SWG meeting scheduled for 10/9/2019
Carl, you will likely have to do the merge, since there are conflicts that have to be resolved
OK. I will do so today/tomorrow.
Cheers
Carl
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 at 1:11 PM David Graham notifications@github.com wrote:
Carl, you will likely have to do the merge, since there are conflicts that have to be resolved
— You are receiving this because your review was requested. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub https://github.com/opengeospatial/cdb-volume-1/pull/3?email_source=notifications&email_token=ADF4ZKY27DVXVA6TBFFMZZTQRHL4TA5CNFSM4I6KLE32YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOECVN6PI#issuecomment-548069181, or unsubscribe https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADF4ZK5YLATTLL3JKQSOLYTQRHL4TANCNFSM4I6KLE3Q .
-- Carl Reed, PhD Carl Reed and Associates
Mobile: 970-402-0284
“Our liberty depends on the freedom of the press, and that cannot be limited without being lost.”
"I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend"
— Thomas Jefferson, U.S. Founding Father
@DavidFLOR, @ryanfranz, and @cnreediii - For info, I use two windows to review the changes.
So that I can compare the files in the PR view and see the results (the formatted documents) in the Branch view.
Looks ok to me. I'll review the GeoPackage text changes independently.
A couple minor changes to the volumes.adoc.
First, for consistency, at the end of the Multi Spectral reference there should be (normative) followed by a ".".
Second, while the GeoPackage extension is optional, the document is normative and not a Best Practice.
I can make these changes after 549 is merged back into the master.
Thanks
And the other changes read well and are internally consistent. Thanks!
All changes OK with me. Go ahead and pull these changes
Text changes to handle CDB CR-549. This makes explicit the requirement to have one GS model descriptor file per model LOD, which makes finding this descriptor file easier.