Putting on GS-dev, since really these are mostly gs questions.
On Thu, Sep 4, 2008 at 11:09 PM, Jody Garnett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> Chris Holmes wrote:
>
>> I'm not sure if I'm yet convinced we should allow this to happen in the
>> main capabilities document, like letting any plugin just dump in vendor
>> specific stuff. I'd like to see a parameter to a caps request to add in the
>> extended data. But could be convinced that we should support it in the main
>> one. But since clients are going to have to know how to handle it anyways I
>> don't see a big loss in making them request it a certain way.
>>
> I do understand your hesitation Chris; it sounds like a scary facility to
> open up to community extensions right? The part I am wanting to be clear (as
> a client of geoserver) is to make sure that every additional thing we dump
> into the GetMap "vendor specific parameters" has some kind of indication
> that it is available in the vendor specific capabilities.
>
> My hope is two fold:
> - someone setting up geoserver can turn "non standard" stuff on or off (by
> including a community extension at the very least)
> - as a client I will be able to tell up front by looking at the
> capabilities document what is supported
> (right now I check the URL and if I see "geoserver/wms" I know a bunch of
> stuff is supported - but since I do not know what version of geoserver is
> being executed it is really a guess - there is a "fall back" of strict
> compliance mode for when I guess poorly.)
That makes a lot of sense, indeed it'd be nice to be able to report on all
our format options that we make available. But I think all I'm saying is I
think I'd prefer a vanilla capabilities document at the
request=GetCapabilities, and then if clients are more advanced and know they
can do request=GetCapabilities&extensions=true or something, and get the
full vendor params.
>
>
>> b) We need to intercept a GetMapRequest with "tiled=true" and
>> dispatch it to GeoWebCache rather than the normal GeoServer GetMap
>> handler....
>>
>> This should be pretty easy, we already have the infrastructure to do this
>> with our little in memory tile cache, which we use for openlayers tile
>> return. So we just need to have that check GeoWebCache too (or instead). I
>> asked Andrea about it, I'll try to add a jira for it, should be able to do
>> it for 1.7.1.
>>
> Agreed; it should not be too bad. I would prefer to have the geowebcache
> extensions register an interest; rather than adding conditional code to the
> existing GetMap functionality. I am not sure how feasible this is ... is it
> something the dispatcher needs to consider? Or is it something that the
> GetMap implementation will check for (much like it checks for output formats
> right now...).
Andrea's probably the man to ask, as I have no idear.
Chris
>
> Cheers,
> Jody
>
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
