Hi Michael,
Might I suggest that since you are aiming for OGC compliance, and from your recent mention of including coordinate system projections, that you narrow your library's focus into something more like Boost.GIS instead of Boost.Geometry?
(snipped)
Thanks, Will think about what you wrote. It is true that the geometry world is huge. It is not that strict OGC compliance is our major goal. But the main reason to use this standard is that it is a sound framework created by a consortium. Actually there is also an ISO standard, ISO 19107 (a.k.a. Topic 1 - Feature Geometry). But that is more or less the same, as far as I know. Don't know other standards on geometry. It is true that we're going for a sort of Geometry+GIS library and we'll probably never meet everyones requirements. However, the current authors of this GGL are GIS / geometry / gaming so we've a reasonable mixture. However, will think about it. So maybe we've to support counter clockwise holeless non closed polygons as well... but indeed we'll get other wishes then... fractals...
P.S. I would love to start using a really fast and elegant Boost.GIS rather than ESRI ArcObjects... Seems that we're doing our best :-)
Regards, Barend