Here’s a proposal to add Lexicons for GeoJSON, WKT, and bounding box representations of spatial geometries:
It’s in draft because there are two open questions in my mind:
Do we like the named properties on the bbox type? Or should we go with a single list property that uses the convention that the ideas should be in [xmin,ymin,xmax,ymax] order? I resisted the latter because it seems harder to validate, and people who aren’t used to working with geo data often get the axes backwards. Being explicit seemed preferable for both reasons.
Adding GeoJSON and WKT geometries would expand ATGeo to support lines, polygons, etc. using interoperable representations. However these types can be arbitrarily large. Does it make more sense to stash these values in a blob and use a strongRef in the geometry record?
Instead of using a byte type for geometry I personally would prefer a ATprotofied version of geoson or maybe better ogc json fg with integers for the coordinates an an optional denominator property ( also an integer) to get the float representation.
That way we get more “ATProtofied” versions of geometries