Rob Atkinson wrote:
> I notice you talk about workspaces in one sentence then "a map" in
> another sentence.  My understanding is that workspaces are bound to
> default namespaces (app-schema will get you out of that, but I've yet
> to get my head around whether workspaces just become an impedence
> overhead, or whether they effectively get bound to differend back-end
> operational systems).
Yes, at this point in time a workspace == namespace, and we don't really 
have the notion of a map. When resource publishing split comes workspace 
will not be bound to a namespace. A namspace will simply be an attribute 
of a layer and not a container for layers. They will exist and be manged 
independently.
> 
> A "map" has a completely different set of semantics.
> 
> I see no particular reason a namespace or back-end operational system
> is necessarily the only way of splitting up the geoserver services -
> you are building a very inflexible solution IMHO. I would like to have
> virtual services where you can put any resource the service should
> offer, not just those defined by a namespace (either a made-up one or
> an app-schema).
> 
Yeah, so do I. And while I am at it I would also like to win the lottery 
tomorrow. We are at a middle ground. What you are asking for is coming 
when the full blown resource publishing split occurs. But this is an 
intermediate step.

> Can we not have a first-class concept of a service, and then map one
> or more workspaces to it as a convenience mechanism?
> 
> I'd also like a single workspace to be available via multiple virtual
> services to different audiences (simple, complete, and transactional
> for example).
> 
> i.e. the mix of functionality for a single workspace is as valid a
> reason for virtualisation as partitioning the set of resources across
> workspaces.
> 
> Rob
> 
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 4:48 AM, Justin Deoliveira <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Recently OpenGeo has received funding to implement the idea of virtual
>> services in a limited form. The basic idea is to provide service
>> endpoints for each workspace so you can make requests like:
>>
>> http://.../geoserver/topp/wfs?request=....
>>
>> Basically what we currently do with workspace filters as a query
>> parameter with some additions. The full GSIP is written up here:
>>
>> http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+44+-+Virtual+services+with+workspaces
>>
>> One thing to note is how this plays with resource publishing split since
>> there is some overlap in this functionality and what resource pub split
>> will provide. I wrote up some notes at the end of the proposal on this.
>> But the gist of it is that the upgrade path should be quite smooth.
>>
>> Actually this work fills one of the gaps that was shot in the resource
>> pub proposal by Jody in that it did not explicitly specify the ability
>> to specify a map in a url path as opposed to specifying it in the query
>> string.
>>
>> Comments and feedback welcome.
>>
>> -Justin
>>
>> --
>> Justin Deoliveira
>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>> Enterprise support for open source geospatial.
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Join us December 9, 2009 for the Red Hat Virtual Experience,
>> a free event focused on virtualization and cloud computing.
>> Attend in-depth sessions from your desk. Your couch. Anywhere.
>> http://p.sf.net/sfu/redhat-sfdev2dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geoserver-devel mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel
>>

-- 
Justin Deoliveira
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Return on Information:
Google Enterprise Search pays you back
Get the facts.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/google-dev2dev
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Reply via email to