Seeing the amount of reactions, maybe it would still be an idea to form
an interest group for this? One of the things I'd hate to see happen
(and what is happening already) is all these initiatives being explored
parallel, whereas IMHO we should be combining forces on this as a
community, since it is a significant effort which also needs careful
thought.
Could space be arranged on the plone site for instance for an interest
group to communicate? What do others think?
Best regards,
Bart
Frank Warmerdam wrote:
On 12/14/05, Doyon, Jean-Francois <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Allow me to elaborate :)
Some examples of things I ran into:
...
- For the OO thing: MapServer does not abstract a lot of it's dependencies
into consistent interfaces. So someone who writes code around mapscript
needs to do a lot of a various conditional checking and adapt around many
possibilities. Case in point: Last I checked, I couldn't get a list of
attribute names for a given data source from MapServer proper. I need to
know it's a shapefile, use a third party DBF module, and do the work
manually. If the data source is postgis, I need a whole different set of
code and exceptions, and so on ... Knowing MapServer itself is already
compiled against all these things, I start seriously feeling like I'm
re-inventing the wheel, and adding more and more dependencies ... Which is
not long-term sustainable.
J.F.
I completely agree. MapServer only demands enough from
the various feature store types to implement map rendering
and simple query support. On the raster side things are
even more primitive. If we want something "studio-like"
for MapServer, we really ought to start by improving the core
infrastructure to provide a better view into the underlying data
sources.
Alternatively, we might see this as a reason not to go down
the "approved studio-like application" road since doing so would
require quite a bit of internal re-engineering.
At the risk of raising a hornets nest, I think MapServer Enterprise
provides much more sophisticated (though complicated) views into
the underlying datasources, and other map objects. While I haven't
tried, I think this makes it much easier to build general purpose
front ends to it. My personal inclination is to keep MapServer
relatively simple, even if this somewhat hobbles fronts ends like MapLab.
Best regards,
--
---------------------------------------+--------------------------------------
I set the clouds in motion - turn up | Frank Warmerdam, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
light and sound - activate the windows | http://pobox.com/~warmerdam
and watch the world go round - Rush | Geospatial Programmer for Rent
--
+------------------------+
| Bart van den Eijnden |
| OSGIS, Open Source GIS |
| http://www.osgis.nl |
+------------------------+
