No, you can esperiment new functionality . Simply you cannot put them in a standard response. The right solution is what say Steafn in ticket.
QGIS has a request QGISPropterySettings. The new powerful but incompatible features put them in it. Don't abuse of standard responses. . Also: You don't undestand. I don't spaek the agency EU. The inspire directive say: that the europan menbers italy, france, deutch, and so on... must recepit the directive them and all their sub agency national and local. The directive don't say fund to put a qgis to be compiant. The drective say use only compliant and interoperability wms product . The EU put no money for this. Every menber can use it want . Commercial or Open product is indifferent. The imprtant is that it is interoperability. The Geoserver is interoperabilyt The Mapserver is interoperability. Why A public administration should choose QGIS-server ? It mean lost fund when there is some one more and more copliant with Inspire. What is the motivation to spend public resource to have a a QGIS-server comliant. I guess this should be interest of who sell service on QGIS to have a qgis compliant otherwise it has not a market in the public administrations. Or better again. Why there is a GetPrint and GetStyle s tags ? In the response: the more easy solution is remove these two tags. I do it in few minutes and can give the patch at we ask me. So why there is this two tags ? They are put from someone. This someone has break the qgis wms compatibility. SO AFAIK should be it to fund for repair what it break. Regards, Andrea. 2014-06-07 21:35 GMT+02:00 Alex Mandel <[email protected]>: > I understand the issue now. In order to be WMS 1.3 complaint you can > only use what's in the spec. > > Looking at an analogy with html specs I find this limitation appalling > short-sighted. It means there can be no innovation testing new features > with the spec unless you manage to get it into the future spec. I find > it hard to comprehend that clients don't just skip tags that fail to > match a known tag. In html land its very common for some browsers to > know some non-standard tags, which are new features in testing to be > proposed or reworked into future standards. IE's policy of only adhering > to the spec and including no experimental tag support has been seen be > web designers as discouraging to any change. Why, because their is no > way to publicly test new ideas. > > So from the QGIS side, in order to comply we would need to reply with > only allowed tags if a user requests WMS=1.3.0, we can reply with more > stuff like GetPrint if they don't specify that version. Or perhaps we > have to invent a 1.3.0+ variant specifically for when a user knows it's > QGIS server. > > Anyone more familiar with WMS that can shed more light on the best way > to work around this issue and have both compliance and the ability to > add extra features that have no standard equivalent yet. > > My point still stands, that EU agencies with this concern should be > funding compliance efforts, not removing funding for lack of compliance. > > Thanks, > Alex > > On 06/07/2014 12:23 PM, Andrea Peri wrote: > > Hi, > > I need to be more clear. > > My english is tremendous. > > :) > > > > The Interoperability mean to have a small set of operation euals on EVERY > > Server WMS. > > > > Equals mena same reqeust , same response. > > > > So when a Cleit WMS send a Request of GetCapabilities, The response > should > > be the same from QGIS-server or from GeoServer or From Mapserver. > > > > The same response mean that every product use the same dialect the same > > tags and so on. > > > > > > The XSD OGC is the dictionary that every wms client and server should use > > to know the right language and tags. > > > > When the QGIS_Server response to a request GetCapbility with an XML that > > contains the GetPrint tags. > > The client wms say "hey what is this ? It is not in the XSD OGC. This > mean > > your response is wrong." > > > > Of course there are some client wms that don0t do a validation of > response, > > they HOPE that the response will be exactly as they exected. > > If this is not true. They go in crash or other bad situation. > > > > Again the resence of a Tag not compliant with XSD OGC will create > > incompatibility. > > > > Think to a client that will parse the xml response and say: > > > > ok the GetLegendGraphics tag is passed now there is "this well know tag". > > > > Instead arrive a GetPrint tags. > > > > The client wms become crazy. > > > > Of course QGIS will understand it. > > But this is because you (qgis group) manage it to work. > > > > But other clients don't know that tag and so they are not able to extract > > all the information from Capabilities response. > > This is a bad practice also because create artiiciosally an > incopatibility > > with other products. > > Instead Inspire ask for INteroperability from every product. > > > > Interoperability don't mean use all the same unique product. (This is the > > microsoft philosophy) > > Interoperability mean All the product must use the same little set of > > command and the response at these command should be compatible > > (interoperable) between all of them > > > > Actulally this is not true for the response xml of qgis-server at a > > getcapability request. > > > > Hope to be better explain, now. > > > > Andrea. > > > > > > 2014-06-07 20:49 GMT+02:00 Andrea Peri <[email protected]>: > > > >> Hi Alex, > >> > >> The question is not the print capability. > >> > >> The question is to LOST THE INTEROPERABILITY > >> > >> If qgis response an xml that is not OGC complaint it is not > interoperable > >> with other product. > >> > >> As example: > >> > >> if an public Administration will eed to do a cascading wms with the > server > >> wms of another public administration. > >> The server before of all call for a GetCapability. > >> > >> If the response has a tag proprietary. If fail. > >> This need Not Interoperable. > >> > >> I dont say do not do a getprint. > >> > >> I say remove tha tag GetPrint from the GetCapabilities response. > >> It is not a OGC tag and so that response is not interoperable as > requested > >> from Inspire specification. > >> > >> Regards, > >> > >> > >> > >> 2014-06-07 20:36 GMT+02:00 Alex Mandel <[email protected]>: > >> > >> On 06/07/2014 11:19 AM, Andrea Peri wrote: > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> AFAIK the qgis server is not complaint with Inspire. > >>>> > >>>> This beacausethe Response to GetCapabilities is not responding to the > >>>> requisite that the OGC will require for it. > >>>> > >>>> Originally the qgis was simply generate an incompatible response for > the > >>>> XSD of OGC. > >>>> > >>>> The response is ncompatible for thre thinks: > >>>> > >>>> 1) the GetCapabilities is in the wrong namespace. > >>>> This is a silly question anc could be easily resolved. > >>>> > >>>> 2) > >>>> The presence of the GetStyle that is dismissed from OGC wms 1.3.0. > >>>> Please notice that the Inspire require the WMS 1.3.0 . > >>>> To resolve this the QGIS groups has copied the XSD of OGC and modifica > >>> it > >>>> to redirect to a different XSD not in the OGC site. > >>>> > >>>> 3) The presence of a Proprietary tag inserted without any reference to > >>> any > >>>> standard. > >>>> The GetPrint. > >>>> This is not present in any other product. > >>>> > >>>> My question is for any person of a Public Administration that plan or > >>> are > >>>> funding QGIS. > >>>> > >>>> In Europe the Inspire directive will ask to promove the > >>> Interoperability. > >>>> > >>>> The interoperability strategy ask that every produc that allow the > >>> inspire > >>>> directive will speak the same language using the same tags and > >>>> functionality. > >>>> > >>>> The QGIS solution to add a proprietary tag and to write a own > different > >>> xsd > >>>> that overlap the standard OGC xsd will create the presuppost (AFAIK) > to > >>>> vilate the Inspire directive. > >>>> > >>>> If this is true A Public Administration should not use the QGIS. > >>>> > >>>> This is a realproblem for us that invest many fund on qgis. > >>>> > >>>> So I like toknow the opinion of other public administration. > >>>> > >>>> Before still fund a product that seem to violate the Inspire directive > >>>> principles. > >>>> > >>>> Thx, > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> To me the question is flipped. What needs to be funded, probably by EU > >>> agencies to ensure INSPIRE compliance of QGIS Server? > >>> It looks like you've put together the list of what needs to be fixed, > so > >>> the target should be easier. I am little puzzled about not allowing for > >>> extra functions that are not in the standard. Unless the WMS has a > print > >>> standard an extra print add-on doesn't break any expectations. Who > >>> knows, maybe that should be submitted as an extension to WMS. > >>> > >>> > >>> Note, this should have no effect on funding and usage of QGIS desktop. > >>> Maybe Paolo has good numbers on if EU agencies are funding Server vs > >>> Desktop features. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Alex > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > -- ----------------- Andrea Peri . . . . . . . . . qwerty àèìòù -----------------
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
