Shapes and object-oriented programming - comparison with Java2D

I am trying to map a rigorous geometry library (JTS) to JavaFX and finding some inconsistencies.
My understanding of Java2D is that the Shape interface provides a standard means of interfacing with the geometry by means of the PathIterator.
Contrast with JavaFX where Shape does not seem to have any reference to the geometry, hence all sub-classes define and access the geometry differently. This seems to be unhelpful and not in the spirit of object-oriented programming. Is this something that could be fixed in future?

Alternatively is there a simple mechanism for translating Java2D geometries into JavaFX scenegraph? (Since the geometry model in Java2D seems to be quite well designed; why was all this good work ignored?)

Also could the Path, PathElement, concept be extended to include the equivalent of a FlatteningPathIterator?

My final comment would be, when designing a 2D geometry based system would it not be better to start with 'proper' geometry model like JTS so that there are no fundamental inconsistencies?

(from Wikipedia - The JTS Topology Suite (JTS) is an open source Java software library that provides an object model for Euclidean planar linear geometry together with a set of fundamental geometric functions. JTS is primarily intended to be used as a core component of vector-based geomatics software such as geographical information systems. It can also be used as a general-purpose library providing algorithms in computational geometry. JTS implements the geometry model and API defined in the OpenGIS Consortium Simple Features Specification for SQL.)