Subject: [Geojson] Resolving issue 149 (geometry vs feature)

From: Sean Gillies <[email-masked]>
Date: Fri, 26 Feb 2016 17:15:29 -0700

In https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/pull/158 I'm attempting to make
a clearer distinction between geometry and feature and at the same time
address Allan's concern about losing the original GeoJSON spec
introduction. I've restored it with some modifications: "geometry" is
GIS-specific jargon that needs a little more explanation, and so is
"feature".

In my view, JSON text examples are better than diagrams. I'll add feature
and feature collection examples to Appendix A and link to them from the
relevant sections of the spec.

--
Sean Gillies

---

From: Allan Doyle <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 29 Feb 2016 17:06:42 -0500

+1, I made a minor comment in the line comments

> On Feb 26, 2016, at 7:15 PM, Sean Gillies <[email-masked]> wrote:
> 
> In https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/pull/158 <https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/pull/158> I'm attempting to make a clearer distinction between geometry and feature and at the same time address Allan's concern about losing the original GeoJSON spec introduction. I've restored it with some modifications: "geometry" is GIS-specific jargon that needs a little more explanation, and so is "feature".
> 
> In my view, JSON text examples are better than diagrams. I'll add feature and feature collection examples to Appendix A and link to them from the relevant sections of the spec.
> 
> --
> Sean Gillies
> _______________________________________________
> GeoJSON mailing list
> [email-masked]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/geojson