Cameron,
On Nov 14, 2007 10:32 PM, Cameron Shorter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Andreas, Steven, I believe quite strongly that the OWS Context document
> should allow Google/Yahoo map layers to be included.
Ok, but the question is *how*.
> The aim of OWS Context is to pass a map view from one application to
> another (think UDig) and for those views to look the same.
Agreed. But to enable that, you need information that cannot be stored
in a context doc, because it is server-specific: API keys. In the case
of Mapbuilder, those would still have to be stored in the config.
> Like it or not, the commercial providers have great maps and in the near
> term, users will want Google Maps as base layers.
As you said, *base layers*. This means that those maps cannot be
included like regular maps using a <Layer>, because the base layer
always has to be on the bottom of the stack. Furthermore, properties
are quite different. I would think a context document containing
commercial base layers would have to look something like this:
<OWSContext>
<General>
...
</General>
<ResourceList>
<BaseLayer provider="Google" map="HYBRID">
<Name>...</Name>
<Title>...</Title>
</BaseLayer>
<Layer ...>
...
</Layer ...>
....
</ResourceList>
</OWSContext>
Just an idea. But there's more that can not be described in a OWS
Context document. Because as soon as you use a commercial map, you
have to use Spherical Mercator projection (EPSG:900913). So the
application would have to ignore SRS specifications of the other
layers. Having said that, this might be one more thing to change in
OWS Context, because it does not make sense: SRS should be a map
property, not a layer property. Or who wants a map with layers that do
not align?
> I believe that we will be able to change the OWS Context spec to
> accommodate commercial map layers, be it by extension or by getting the
> providers to become standards compliant.
The latter would be better.
Anyway, what we need now is a solution that will help us bring
commercial layer support into 1.5. So either we use the approach to
define the baselayer in the config, or we invent an OWS Context
derivate that might never become a standard. I'm undecided which way
to go, but I would not specify commercial layers like regular layers.
The reason for that, as described in my previous posting, is that
layer controls should not change the position of the base layer in the
stack of layers.
Regards,
Andreas.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Splunk Inc.
Still grepping through log files to find problems? Stop.
Now Search log events and configuration files using AJAX and a browser.
Download your FREE copy of Splunk now >> http://get.splunk.com/
_______________________________________________
mapbuilder-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mapbuilder-devel
