To be clear, I personally don't have a problem with 1.1.1. My concern is about version negotiation as a WMS client. I've seen users omit the version and then when something doesn't behave as expected, they manually (in a web browser) make a request as follows:

http://www.example.com?request=GetCapabilities&service=WMS

But as well all know, that'd return a WMS 1.3.0 service capabilities document (assuming the server supports 1.3.0). So they look at that document and cannot identify the problem. Then they fuddle around and eventually realize that GDAL overrides the version and it makes a request as follows:

http://www.example.com?request=GetCapabilities&service=WMS&version=1.1.1

I think WMS 1.3.0 has been annoying since day one, especially with attention to axis ordering (ISO-ifying). *cough, cough* However, I can't recall seeing a server that didn't support 1.3.0. I have no objection about a user choosing a default version to use by explicitly specifying it. My objection is that if a version is omitted, the software chooses an old default (which doesn't fit into typical version negotiation with a server) which can cause confusion.

I'm wondering if we're past the 1.3.0 "hate-on" yet? :) It does seem a bit "big brother" to peg OWS client negotiation to a old version in a library. I assume there are reasons, and I've been the first in this thread to cite possibly the biggest one.

Thanks for your feedback so far. Everyone loves a good WMS 1.3.0 discussion :)

Tim

On 02/03/2016 9:58 AM, Timothy Astle wrote:
Does anyone know why the WMS Driver defaults to version 1.1.1 instead of 1.3.0 by default? Does anyone have any objections with this changing to 1.3.0? It seems like 1.3.0 would fall more into line with the specifications content negotiation.

https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/blob/trunk/gdal/frmts/wms/wmsdriver.cpp#L96
http://www.gdal.org/frmt_wms.html
"WMS version. (optional, defaults to 1.1.1)"

_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev

Reply via email to