Well it is an interesting discussion; and it will be a very important area for all implementations to succeed with (if the vision of process chaining is to proceed). I am especially keen to see both client code appear; and also how the different implementations will act as "clients" when they are chaining the output from another WPS.
Indeed for WPS we finally have a specification which the server implementations are on the hook to write client code as well :-) Jody On 20/09/2010, at 7:57 PM, Gérald Fenoy wrote: > Hi Jody, > thanks for your answer. > > Indeed we wish to get blog posts about this specifically, I'm hopping than > some of this mailing list readers will post on their own blog. Somebody from > the ZOO-Discuss mailing list already post the content of the previous mail > [1]. > > Hope to see more blog posts about this, > best regards, > > [1] > http://3liz.com/blog/rldhont/index.php/2010/09/20/344-zoo-project-wps-validity-report > > Le 20 sept. 2010 à 11:09, Jody Garnett a écrit : > >> With respect to your testing of zoo - you may wish to pass this information >> on as a blog post so it shows up on osgeo planet along with the other foss4g >> summaries. >> > > Gérald Fenoy > ZOO PSC Chair > [email protected] > > _______________________________________________ > Discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
_______________________________________________ Discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
