PUT
Simply pass in a chunk of XML, and that object is updated.
Wait, can you just pass in part of the node/segment/ect. ? Or do you
have to pass the whole thing in? The api notes aren't super clear.
Like if I already have <tag k="name" v="Camden Road"/> can I do a put
with only: <tag k="name" v="Camdin Road"/> and it will update?
Or do I have to do the whole:
<segment id="22" from="155337" to="155328" timestamp="2005-04-17
15:12:03" >
<tag k="name" v="Camdin Road"/>
</segment>
to get it to update?
If there's a way to just pass in an attribute and have that update then
you could combine insert and update more efficiently. Though you'd also
need a way to do an update that allows you to remove a tag/attribute.
Chris
DELETE
Just pass in the id
To me, standardization doesn't seem much more complicated than adding the Atom
Publishing Protocol on top of WFS Simple
----- Original Message ----
From: Raj Singh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Jo Walsh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: Chris Holmes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Geoserver-devel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; [EMAIL
PROTECTED]; Geotools-Devel list <[email protected]>; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, November 28, 2006 5:35:11 AM
Subject: Re: [WFSBasic.Users] [Geotools-devel] Versioning WFS-T and protocol
extensions
I kind of agree with Chris. To do transactions right moves out of
Simple land. Once you want to update or edit a data set you need to
know all kinds of things about the structure of that data. Not to
mention the other issues. Maybe openstreetmap people could offer some
advice?
---
Raj
On Nov 27, 2006, at 7:15 PM, Jo Walsh wrote:
On Mon, Nov 27, 2006 at 06:37:16PM -0500, Chris Holmes wrote:
I would love it if we could include our ideas on transactions and
versioning and the like in WFS-Simple, but unfortunately I do fear
that
when you get in to transactions, authentication, and versioning
you're
no longer in 'simple' land (indeed I myself might argue against their
place in a simple spec).
Then 'Simple' is kind of a misnomer. 'Basic' was the original name,
right? I would have thought being able to write a feature to a web
feature service was a fairly basic operation ;P
You don't need much of the rest of WFS, right, to do Transactions?
Like Filter support and POST queries, GML comprehension and emission,
all these non-Simple things. The question is not "why should it be
WFS-T" but "why shouldn't it also be this other, kind of WFS-like
thing"
!DSPAM:1003,456c34bf61471995013331!
--
Chris Holmes
The Open Planning Project
http://topp.openplans.org
begin:vcard
fn:Chris Holmes
n:Holmes;Chris
org:The Open Planning Project
adr:;;377 Broadway, 11th Floor;New York;NY;10013;USA
email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
title:VP, Strategic Development
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://topp.openplans.org
version:2.1
end:vcard
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Take Surveys. Earn Cash. Influence the Future of IT
Join SourceForge.net's Techsay panel and you'll get the chance to share your
opinions on IT & business topics through brief surveys - and earn cash
http://www.techsay.com/default.php?page=join.php&p=sourceforge&CID=DEVDEV
_______________________________________________
Geotools-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
