Parquet Geospatial Compatibility Recommendations

[cholmes]

Attempt to explain the idea of making parquet files that are compatible, but aren't GeoParquet, as a recommendation for data producers and readers.

Big questions:

• Does the naming sound right? Are there alternatives?
• Does it successfully walk the line of explaining this option but not making it a 'spec' where people would only implement it and say they make 'GeoParquet'.

I put it in 'format-specs', but could put it elsewhere or rename that directory.

Any other tweaks / feedback are welcome as well.

[mojodna]

Thanks for floating this. It's a nice compromise for those of us who don't control the development/deployment cycle of the readers/writers we use.

[alasarr]

LGTM. Thanks a lot for moving this forward @cholmes 👏

[jatorre]

Sorry for the delay in here, but it was me I think who expressed issues with the naming. It is hard to say if geometry is more common than geography. One way to overcome entirely this issue that we have done in CARTO is start using geo when we dont know if something might be a geometry or a geography, as it only implies that there is geospatial data, but without knowing if it is a geometry o a geography.

My 2 cents