Tim Schaub ha scritto: ... >> Since we have a human in the middle (either as the programmer that sets >> up the connection to a well known server, or as the user that pastes >> the capabilities) we could provide him with options, profiles, that >> would generate different capabilities documents. Stuff like: >> http://.../ows?SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetCapabilities&srsProfile=full >> http://.../ows?SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetCapabilities&srsProfile=limited >> and then have a few more capabilities links in the UI. >> (btw, smart == limited, layers always show up in their native >> projection anyways afaik?) >> >> How does this sound? > > Ok, yeah, this is the point. > > GeoServer is hugely capable, the default (and I assume rarely changed) > configuration is to advertise everything, and this effectively renders > the capabilities doc useless (or less handy at least) to subset of > clients. (Let's say it is a separate discussion to determine which > clients should and should not be asking GeoServer about its capabilities.) > > Your suggestion is to allow clients to advertise something about their > own capabilities ("I only care to parse limited capabilities docs" or > "please send me a list of everything under the sun"). > > I also like Arne's suggestion about allowing the client to advertise a > bit more ("I only care about your capabilities if you support these SRS"). > > The srsProfile parameter in a query is a handy shortcut, but requires > the client and server to share some understanding about the meaning. > > A more flexible solution would allow a client to say something like: > tell me what you've got in this region, in these SRS, etc. > > This gets beyond the initial motivation, but as long as we're talking > about allowing a client to ask for a filtered set of capabilities, is it > nuts to think about BBOX and SRS filters?
Hmmm... no, not really. What you're suggesting is: * more flexible * more work on both sides I believe, the client has to figure out how to compose the request (instead of just "gimme something that won't kill my arcgis"), the server has to setup some longer filtering code. But I have nothing specific against them. In fact some time ago I was suggesting to add namespace or layer filtering, but since that will be covered by workspaces/maps, it's no more needed. Cheers Andrea ------------------------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008. http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/ _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
