Hey- So, tests are now passing with the WFS protocol. I think this is pretty close and would appreciate any help creating tests, trying it out, etc.
The patch [1] includes a very basic Save strategy. This is a manual save strategy (requires that you call save). It can be used as the basis for auto or greedy save strategies, but I think we should keep it simple for this patch. Thanks for any assistance testing/reviewing. Tim [1] http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1648 Tim Schaub wrote: > Hey- > > I put up a patch that represents progress towards a working WFS protocol. > > http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1648 > > I'll work on it a bit more tomorrow. Please feel free to pick it up and > push it forward (anyone). The wfs-protocol-transactions.html example is > a good place to start with a debugger. In the end, this example will do > inserts, updates, and deletes (with a commit from the save button). > > Tim > > Björn Harrtell wrote: >> I have been making a serious (relatively? :) attempt at understanding >> what is to be done regarding Protocol.WFS and related classes. I looked >> at it from the angle in which it would be useful for me in the case I >> described before. >> >> * the standard WFS-T >> * Fixed and Save (and perhaps SaveGreedy) strategy >> >> From I can gather none of these are far from complete, but what I'm >> missing is option to filter the input in Fixed strategy. I noticed that >> the trunk version of BBOX strategy looks for additional filters in the >> layer and while it might be a good place put the additional filter I >> can't see any indication that Layer actually is supposed to support such >> a property. If it should it should be documented and used by fixed >> strategy also? >> >> I would like to to implement this before beeing able to do serious >> testing. I nice thing is that I could test stuff directly in a real >> world case where I'm using (successfully) the clumsy old Layer.WFS way >> with a temp layer. But before that I would like to confirm that I got >> the right idea... >> >> A question on the side... why are some methods declared "JSONy" i.e >> 'read' instead of read? >> >> /Björn >> >> On Wed, Sep 17, 2008 at 2:10 AM, Tim Schaub <[EMAIL PROTECTED] >> <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>> wrote: >> >> Hey- >> >> Björn Harrtell wrote: >> > Hi devs, >> > >> > I'm coding an application that uses OL vector editing and WFS >> > transactions quite heavily. >> > >> > I use a temporary OpenLayers.Layer.Vector for editing, moving >> stuff to a >> > OpenLayers.Layer.WFS as the user makes edits. This is a bit >> clumsy and >> > complicated but works. The reason why I'm doing this is because >> > OpenLayers.Layer.WFS only supports GET and is also loading >> features on >> > demand (hmm is this correct?) which doesn't fit my needs. Note >> that I do >> > not add the OpenLayers.Layer.WFS to a map, I only use >> create/commit the >> > WFS transactions. >> > >> > I would like to use something like a static/manually triggered WFS >> > (supporting POST and filtering) source to an OpenLayers.Layer.Vector >> > that syncs changes to the WFS source which then can be commited >> > programmatically. >> > >> > Is this sort of what OpenLayers.Protocol.WFS (which I think is beeing >> > worked on?) is supposed to be used for? Or would it be sensible >> to make >> > something more of OpenLayers.Layer.WFS instead? >> >> Yes, this is exactly the job for a WFS protocol. As Eric mentions, the >> work is mostly in the vector-behavior sandbox. I'll make an effort to >> update that and to get a patch ready for the trunk. >> >> My hope is to get the WFS protocol in the trunk before the end of next >> week. Any help you can contribute would be appreciated. >> >> Watch the WFS protocol ticket [1] for updates from me, and leave any >> comments/patches there that you put together. >> >> Tim >> >> [1] http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/1648 >> >> >> > >> > Either way, I'm interested in (trying) to help out if this seems like >> > something you would like to support in OL, and can probably do it >> as a >> > part of the current project as it would simplify things for me I >> think. >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > Björn Harrtell >> > GIS Consultant >> > SWECO Position AB >> > <http://www.swecogroup.com/en/Sweco-group/Services/Geographic-IT/> >> > >> > >> > >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Dev mailing list >> > [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> > http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev >> >> >> -- >> Tim Schaub >> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org >> Expert service straight from the developers. >> _______________________________________________ >> Dev mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev >> >> > > -- Tim Schaub OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Expert service straight from the developers. _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
