Andrea Aime wrote: > Community schema is a nice to have, but lack of it did not stop > people from deploying WFS server all around the world. > Why do you have to put community schema as a requirement for everything > that has to be done in GeoServer is frankly beyond my comprehension. > I won't discuss this any further, since this is about feature type > configuration, not about the UI framework.
Community schema support directly impacts the choice of UI framework because editing a complex feature data-store-to-feature-type mapping is a complicated process. (Probably much more complicated than any other configuration supported by GeoServer.) One of the decisions in the choice of a UI framework is whether it can readily support the manipulation of complex data stores. In my (albeit limited) experience, I have found that complex feature mappings can be deeply nested, and require detailed type binding. This suggests that a UI to manipulate them will have to be rather sophisticated, perhaps ruling out web-based front ends. So why support complex features at all? GeoServer is no doubt a handy tool for converting database queries into simple XML, but until the generated XML can be mapped to conform to community schemas, interoperability will be limited. Perhaps this is a niche goal at the moment, but I suspect that the future benefits will substantial. -- Ben Caradoc-Davies <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Software Engineer, CSIRO Exploration and Mining Australian Resources Research Centre 26 Dick Perry Ave, Kensington WA 6151, Australia ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
