Hello
I think I'm stuck on a similar problem and maybe I can give further information.
I'm basically doing the same thing, testing the WFS service with Mapinfo and while a GetFeature issued from a browser works fine, the same thing done from Mapinfo doesn't work. (WMS works fine)

After poking around with various tools, I start to believe this might be a POST vs. GET issue.
A browser works with GET requests and appends parameters to the URL, including the vital map path. This works fine.
However MapServer in GetCapabilities advertises the POST services too, and some clients will indeed send their requests as POST of XML data. Mapinfo does it for sure.
Now: no matter what workaround I use to bring the map into the request, this will still appear as an URL parameter, while the rest of the request is posted as XML.
My feeling is that mapserv.exe gets confused about this and thinks that this is really a GET request and starts complaining in various ways about lack of parameters.

If that's the real issue, then I can think of some workarounds. The first being how to reinject the map into the request without using a URL parameter. Any idea?

Hope I haven't been too confusing
TIA
F.Antognini


On 4/26/06, Léveillé, James <[EMAIL PROTECTED] > wrote:
Hi all,
 
I'm trying to test MapServer (v 4.8.3), the WFS service, with MapInfo (v 8.0) and keep having this error message:
 
"The WFS Server returned data which was neither in the requested format nor a recognized WFS service exception : POST body is short.
In response to a DescribeFeatureType request, the WFS Server returned an invalid feature type."
 
The GetCapabilities looks fine, and the GetFeature works fine with IE ...
Here is my (simple) MapFile.
 
THANKS A LOT !!!
<snip> 

...................
 
 </snip>
__________________________________________
James Léveillé
 
Intélec Géomatique
420, boul. Charest Est
Bureau 400
Québec (QC), Canada
G1K 8M4
 
Intélec Géomatique: 418.687.5000
MTQ: 418.380.2005 (#227)


--
Francesco Antognini
Computer Consultant
Switzerland
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to