afaik, coverage names do not have the same restrictions than WFS type names, neither WMS layer names have. This might be trivial once the resource/publish split is there, but we're not there yet.
_Ideally_, "native" names could be whatever you want, and there might be a publishing configuration where you can assign a published name to a resource (that's LayerInfo). But we're honestly far from there yet. The least we could do though, for 2.0, is leave coverage names be whatever (or almost?) and FeatureTypes follow the NCName production rule so they're valid for WFS _and_ they can still contain '.' | '-' | '_' among letters and digits? What do you think Andrea? Cheers, Gabriel Simone Giannecchini wrote: > Just to clarify, > going from memory I seem to remember that I have many coverages > configured in various installations whose name contains: ^,[,],(,) > etc. etc. > Are we saying that these coverages won't work with GeoServer 2.0? I > hope not, I would have an hard time convincing people to rework their > configurations that contains thousands of layers! > > Simone. > > ------------------------------------------------------- > Ing. Simone Giannecchini > GeoSolutions S.A.S. > Founder - Software Engineer > Via Carignoni 51 > 55041 Camaiore (LU) > Italy > > phone: +39 0584983027 > fax: +39 0584983027 > mob: +39 333 8128928 > > > http://www.geo-solutions.it > http://geo-solutions.blogspot.com/ > http://simboss.blogspot.com/ > http://www.linkedin.com/in/simonegiannecchini > > ------------------------------------------------------- > > > > On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Gabriel Roldan <[email protected]> wrote: >> Andrea Aime wrote: >>> Simone Giannecchini ha scritto: >>>> Hi list, >>>> I was playing around today with geoserver trunk code and I noticed >>>> that coverages with dot as part of the name do not work anymore due to >>>> the new config/ui work. >>>> This should be seen as a regression since it is quite frequent to have >>>> raster data generated with dots as part of the name. >>>> Should I opne upa Jira? >>> I guess so. I know we have had issues with feature type names with dots >>> as well, as they are common type names in SDE land, but they are not >>> valid in WFS 1.1 (not sure about WFS 1.0). >>> >>> The current code in BasicResourceConfig adds a pattern validator >>> like: [\\w_]\\w* (either a word char or a underscore and then only >>> word chars). >>> >>> First off it would be nice to have a list of the valid patterns >>> for the various services, and then we have to decide if being >>> lax and allow invalid chars in the name for some services or not >>> (e.g. say the dot is valid for wfs 1.0 but on wfs 1.1, what do >>> we do?) >> aliasing works (around) just fine. >> Irony is, dots _are_ valid characters for an element and attribute name >> (except for the first character in the name) in XML. They're valid both for >> xml Name and NCName[1]. >> Not completely sure, but it looks like they're valid since November 2008[2]. >> The WFS 1.1 spec, section 7.3, also explicitly quotes the xml spec NCName >> production rule and dots are included: >> >> #quote >> [4] NCName ::= (Letter | '_') (NCNameChar)* >> /* An XML Name, minus the ":" */ >> [5] NCNameChar ::= Letter | Digit | '.' | '-' | '_' | CombiningChar | >> Extender >> [6] QName ::= (Prefix ':')? LocalPart >> [7] Prefix ::= NCName >> [8] LocalPart ::= NCName >> #/quote >> >> and the attached xsd and xml instance do validate, so it's confirmed. >> Yet I wonder why we (me included) were so convinced dots were not allowed? >> No idea.. >> >> Cheers, >> Gabriel >> >> [1]<http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-xmlschema11-2-20090430/datatypes.html#NCName> >> [2]<http://www.w3.org/XML/xml-V10-4e-errata#E09> >>> Cheers >>> Andrea >>> >>> >> >> -- >> Gabriel Roldan >> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org >> Expert service straight from the developers. >> >> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ >> Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day >> trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus >> on >> what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with >> Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july >> _______________________________________________ >> Geoserver-devel mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel >> >> -- Gabriel Roldan OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Expert service straight from the developers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day trial. Simplify your report design, integration and deployment - and focus on what you do best, core application coding. Discover what's new with Crystal Reports now. http://p.sf.net/sfu/bobj-july _______________________________________________ Geoserver-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
