Chris Holmes wrote: > I've tried to dispel this notion of yours several times. Our role on > OWS-4 is much different from yours on OWS-3. We're not working on a > new spec, we're implementing an existing one. So we don't have a > recommendation paper on spec changes at the end, we don't talk about > the specs on calls. Sorry Chris if I have misunderstood you - I do understand that you are not producing a specification (or even change requests). But I am pretty sure you are providing an implementation report? And as such you have an opportunity to report on problems such as this one. > TOPP is a member of OGC so we can submit change requests, but it's not > because of OWS-4 involvement. If/when we hear back on wfs-dev I'll > put in the appropriate requests. Thank you very much Chris, I was not trying to suggest we change anything (as that is indeed not your mandate for OWS-4), but we do need to report difficulties (and if something is truely broken break out vendor specific parameters).
In this case something does not seem very broken, to produce that capabilities document you probably need to take a lowest common of the data sources in the configuration, or in worst case produce several capabilities documents. Jody ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security? Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642 _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
