Hi Andrea,
Ok, I was getting quite confused there for a bit, but I've figured out
what's going on now. The WCS specs build on another specification - "OGC
Web Services Common Specification" - and *that* is the place they talk
about version negotiation. I had assumed because it wasn't specified it
just built on the previous version (that being 1.0.0). And you are (of
course) correct, they have indeed replaced Version with AcceptVersions.
Thanks for the correction!
> WCS 1.0 is probably based on 1.0, WCS 1.1 still probably based on OWS
1.0 but not sure, WCS 2.0 I believe is based on OWS 2.0
If you're curious, WCS 1.0 doesn't seem to be based on any - probably
why it declares that stuff explicitly. WCS 1.1 is OWSC 1.0, WCS 1.1.1
and 1.1.2 are OWSC 1.1.1, and of course WCS 2 is OWSC 2. "Fun fun"
indeed! :-)
> it's not part of the OGC specifications. As such, it's free to behave
as it pleases when you use it.
It's probably me again, but the OWSC subclause D.11 (both version 1.1
and 2.0, (it's subclause C.11 in 1.0)) does seem to cover these
scenarios and does have provision for what to do if "version" is set.
This seems to be the pertinent part:
"""
A server may also optionally implement the old-style version negotiation
mechanism so
that old clients that send GetCapabilities requests containing a
“version” parameter can
be served. If both a “version” and an AcceptVersions parameter exist in
a GetCapabilities
request, the server shall ignore the “version” parameter.
a) The old-style version negotiation process using the GetCapabilities
operation is as
follows: The client initially makes a GetCapabilities operation request
identifying the
latest version it supports, and then the server responds to
GetCapabilities operation
requests:
1) If no version number is specified in the request, the server shall
respond with the
highest version it supports.
2) If the version number specified in the request is supported by the
server, the
server shall respond with that version.
3) If the version number specified in the request is lower than the
lowest version
supported by the server, the server shall respond with the lowest
version that it
supports.
4) If the version number specified in the request is higher than the
lowest version
supported by the server, the server shall respond with the highest
version it
supports that is lower than the requested version.
"""
So while it's optional, it does seem to be specified what to do if the
option is implemented. If I'm reading this right, this scenario falls
under item (4).
But yes, this was mostly just a curious aside before I got drawn into
the exciting world of OGC standards!
Thanks again!
Jonathan
On 2018-03-30 18:26, Andrea Aime wrote:
Hi Jonathan,
as said above, using "version" in GetCapabilities is a GeoServer
vendor extension, it's not part of the OGC specifications.
As such, it's free to behave as it pleases when you use it.
The version negotiation protocol is described in the various OWS
documents, each version of a protocol
is based on a different version of OWS, e.g., WCS 1.0 is probably
based on 1.0, WCS 1.1 still probably
based on OWS 1.0 but not sure, WCS 2.0 I believe is based on OWS 2.0
(fun fun):
http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/common
Go look for "GetCapabilities request KVP encoding" or something
similar to find the requested behavior
Cheers
Andrea
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 7:20 PM, Jonathan Moules
<jonathan-li...@lightpear.com <mailto:jonathan-li...@lightpear.com>>
wrote:
Hi Andrea,
Interesting, I'd not come across AcceptBersions before. A quick
search through the WCS specs (Ctrl-F) indicates it first appears
in 1.1.0, then the 1.1.1, and 1.1.2, and finally a single
reference in 2.0.1. However none of them actually seem to explain
it (they're either UML or XML examples), though I can guess what
it does.
I've opened a ticket for it (8670).
(Incidentally, it's my first ticket using this new portal and I
have to say - it's a real chore. Absurdly slow page loads, lots of
login/redirect problems across two browsers, and once logged in
it's non-obvious how to create a ticket.
Also, I there was a big friendly "ACCESS DENIED" which may be as a
result of the link I followed to get there - it's repeatable for
me if I use the link from here to login -
https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/projects/GEOS/summary
<https://osgeo-org.atlassian.net/projects/GEOS/summary> - the
sign-up link there has the word "admin" in the URL, so I wonder if
you're trying to get people to log in to the admin account by
accident?)
Thanks,
Jonathan
On 2018-03-30 17:33, Andrea Aime wrote:
Hi Jonathan,
there migth well be some issue in version negotiation, but the
parameter to be used normally
is acceptVersions, not version (version works for any other call
but GetCapabiltiies, GeoServer still uses it
in case there is an exact match). That might play a role too.
Cheers
Andrea
On Fri, Mar 30, 2018 at 5:52 PM, Jonathan Moules
<jonathan-li...@lightpear.com
<mailto:jonathan-li...@lightpear.com>> wrote:
Hi List,
I have a version negotiation question for WCS.
I'm making GetCapabilities requests to various public boxes
for WCS version 1.1.2, and GeoServer doesn't seem to support
this particular version. GeoServer seems to go from 1.1.1,
then straight to 2.0.1; I guess that's what got funded.
The odd thing is in this scenario, GeoServer is returning
the 2.0.1 GetCap. I would have expected the 1.1.1
GetCapabilities.
The only WCS spec I can see that discusses version
negotiation is the WCS 1.0.0 spec. Section 6.2.4 says:
" If no version number is specified in the request, the
server must respond with the highest version it understands
and label the response accordingly."
Ok, but I *did* specify a version number. My query is
something like:
http://example.com/geoserver/ows?request=GetCapabilities&service=WCS&version=1.1.2
<http://example.com/geoserver/ows?request=GetCapabilities&service=WCS&version=1.1.2>
So these are the negotiation rules in the spec:
"a) If the server implements the requested version
number, the server must send that version.
b) If a version unknown to the server is requested, the
server must send the highest version it knows that is less
than the requested version.
c) If the client request is for a version lower than any
of those known to the server, then the server must send the
lowest version it knows.
[snip]"
So my question is, which of these rules is triggering? To
my mind it should be rule (b) - I'm requesting an unknown
number, so the server should be returning the highest version
that's *less* than it, so 1.1.1.
Am I misreading the spec/situation or is this a bug in
GeoServer's negotiating?
Cheers,
Jonathan
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-users mailing list
Please make sure you read the following two resources before
posting to this list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton:
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
<http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/>
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines:
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html
If you want to request a feature or an improvement, also see
this:
https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/Successfully-requesting-and-integrating-new-features-and-improvements-in-GeoServer
<https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/Successfully-requesting-and-integrating-new-features-and-improvements-in-GeoServer>
Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
<mailto:Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users>
--
Regards,
Andrea Aime
==GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.==Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolfTechnical LeadGeoSolutions S.A.S.Via di Montramito 3/A
<https://maps.google.com/?q=Via+di+Montramito+3/A+%0D%0A+55054+%C2%A0Massarosa&entry=gmail&source=g>55054
Massarosa
<https://maps.google.com/?q=Via+di+Montramito+3/A+%0D%0A+55054+%C2%A0Massarosa&entry=gmail&source=g>
(LU)phone: +39 0584 962313 <tel:+39%200584%20962313>fax: +39 0584
1660272 <tel:+39%200584%20166%200272>mob: +39 339 8844549
<tel:+39%20339%20884%204549>http://www.geo-solutions.ithttp://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
<http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it>
AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta
elettronica e/o nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi
strettamente riservate. Il loro utilizzo è consentito
esclusivamente al destinatario del messaggio, per le finalità
indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora riceviate questo messaggio
senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo cortesemente di
darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla distruzione del
messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema. Conservare il
messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte, distribuirlo ad
altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità diverse,
costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal
D.Lgs. 196/2003.
The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended
solely for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and
may be confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the
provisions of privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003,
no.196 - Italy's New Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord
with its purpose, any disclosure, reproduction, copying,
distribution, or either dissemination, either whole or partial,
is strictly forbidden except previous formal approval of the
named addressee(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact immediately the sender by telephone, fax or e-mail and
delete the information in this message that has been received in
error. The sender does not give any warranty or accept liability
as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent mes sages and
accepts no responsibility for changes made after they were sent
or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission, viruses, etc.
--
Regards,
Andrea Aime
==GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit
http://goo.gl/it488V for more information.==Ing. Andrea Aime
@geowolfTechnical LeadGeoSolutions S.A.S.Via di Montramito 3/A55054
Massarosa (LU)phone: +39 0584 962313fax: +39 0584 1660272mob: +39
339 8844549http://www.geo-solutions.ithttp://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
AVVERTENZE AI SENSI DEL D.Lgs. 196/2003
Le informazioni contenute in questo messaggio di posta elettronica e/o
nel/i file/s allegato/i sono da considerarsi strettamente riservate.
Il loro utilizzo è consentito esclusivamente al destinatario del
messaggio, per le finalità indicate nel messaggio stesso. Qualora
riceviate questo messaggio senza esserne il destinatario, Vi preghiamo
cortesemente di darcene notizia via e-mail e di procedere alla
distruzione del messaggio stesso, cancellandolo dal Vostro sistema.
Conservare il messaggio stesso, divulgarlo anche in parte,
distribuirlo ad altri soggetti, copiarlo, od utilizzarlo per finalità
diverse, costituisce comportamento contrario ai principi dettati dal
D.Lgs. 196/2003.
The information in this message and/or attachments, is intended solely
for the attention and use of the named addressee(s) and may be
confidential or proprietary in nature or covered by the provisions of
privacy act (Legislative Decree June, 30 2003, no.196 - Italy's New
Data Protection Code).Any use not in accord with its purpose, any
disclosure, reproduction, copying, distribution, or either
dissemination, either whole or partial, is strictly forbidden except
previous formal approval of the named addressee(s). If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact immediately the sender by
telephone, fax or e-mail and delete the information in this message
that has been received in error. The sender does not give any warranty
or accept liability as the content, accuracy or completeness of sent
messages and accepts no responsibility for changes made after they
were sent or for other risks which arise as a result of e-mail
transmission, viruses, etc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-users mailing list
Please make sure you read the following two resources before posting to this
list:
- Earning your support instead of buying it, but Ian Turton:
http://www.ianturton.com/talks/foss4g.html#/
- The GeoServer user list posting guidelines:
http://geoserver.org/comm/userlist-guidelines.html
If you want to request a feature or an improvement, also see this:
https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/Successfully-requesting-and-integrating-new-features-and-improvements-in-GeoServer
Geoserver-users@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-users
