I am going to wait for Jim to answer that one; i can see the use for it if you are writing a super specific process for a custom deployment (something like fetch me the PDF reports for this county; and you pass in the county).
But here is the thing; in these cases the user has already defined a schema (the describe feature type response for example) and they can refer to it in their WPS describeProcess. I can see no reason to have a general purpose Feature. Note in the geotools api when you do have a feature collection (or feature) parameter you can define the schema associated with it using one of the Param constants. I presume the describe process will refer to the feature type namespace/prefix information in this case? Jody On 14/06/2010, at 6:49 PM, Andrea Aime wrote: > Jody Garnett ha scritto: >> Only thing I would add is Geometry parameters. > > Oh, and what about Feature parameters? > There is one example process that deals with the single > feature... having a hard time deciding whether it's just > a bad idea and feature collections should suffice, or > if there is an actual good reason to make single > feature processes at all. > > Cheers > Andrea > > > > -- > Andrea Aime > OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org > Expert service straight from the developers. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ThinkGeek and WIRED's GeekDad team up for the Ultimate GeekDad Father's Day Giveaway. ONE MASSIVE PRIZE to the lucky parental unit. See the prize list and enter to win: http://p.sf.net/sfu/thinkgeek-promo _______________________________________________ Geotools-devel mailing list Geotools-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
