Given the obvious focus and lead of the Met/ocean and climate
communities on interoperability, core capablities in time series
portrayals would be very welcome I expect.
Rob A
On Thu, Jul 28, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 11:33 PM, Gabriel Roldan wrote:
>> WRT t
+1
sounds pretty cool.
It would be nice to allow a range and step size instead of just
discrete value list
maybe avalmin avalmax avalstep
or avalstep=start,end,stepsize
I also think you need an example of how CQL_filter would have an
avalue - i suspect it would need to be a parameter within a
+1 from me.
Although I'm somewhat on the outside these days I get a sense of a
more orderly and better communicated evolution with fewer nasty
suprises and fantastic levels of mutual support across teams and
geographic boundaries. Respect!
Rob
On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Justin Deoliveira
+1.
No doubt it will raise the ante for describing the content of layers
better - both structurally (schema) and the domain and range of each
element.
some interesting movement in OGC to make the capabilities more
modular, which is another necessary precursor to describing data well.
Rob
On Mon
there will be interest from
the Spatial Information Services Stack project, (contributing the
app-schema support) in this as some of the funding comes from the
earth resources sector, and they have a lot of 3D data.
Regards
Rob Atkinson
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:12 AM, Sjoerd Brandsma wrote:
>
+1 for option 1
I think your concerns are well justified, and only if someone had some
major funding milestone needing a RC today should we consider it.
Rob
On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 11:51 AM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Hi all,
> As was discussed last week the plan is to start the RC1 release tomo
looks like a good idea.
my first thought was how does this relate to GeoXACML - and I see you
have been thinking about this - is it possible to map out what
GeoXACML would require and how this proposal supports this? If I was
an expert in GeoXACML I'd do this myself - but I'd then be in the dark
a
whether OWS can be considered
RESTful :-) (and the answer is of course no!)
good luck with the workarounds - its really working around I.E's
behaviour, which is frustrating on many levels.
Rob
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 10:00 AM, Rob Atkinson wrote:
> moral support, at the very least :-)
>
>
moral support, at the very least :-)
I'll forward it on to the OGC as well - and see if I can get a
response. There is an emerging discussion on HTTP protocol and
browser-friendliness...
Rob
On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 6:18 AM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> Hi,
> tried implement the OWS 2.0 policy of retur
+1 on this strategy
its perfectly natural to have "levels of conformance" - and at some
point someone will probably want to define limited functionality
profiles of these specs - so it should be possible to prioritise
improvements against such requirements if and when they emerge,
otherwise be dri
+1
it seems that we've captured one concern when dealing with another -
rest and configuration management are independent concepts, and we've
either applied policy to REST, where we want to apply it to config, or
we've named a config interface after the protocol. Worth fixing at
some stage - but i
+1 - welcome back!
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 2:07 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies
wrote:
> I am pleased to nominate Gabriel Roldán for the GeoServer Project
> Steering Committee.
>
> Gabriel is a former PSC member whose reputation precedes him; Gabriel is
> a prolific committer [1], maintainer of ArcSDE plu
"The optional numberOfFeatures attribute is used to indicate the
number of features that are in the response document."
Why not just ignore it by default (maybe a configuration flag to force it).
Does anyone know of any clients that rely on it (even though its optional?)
Rob
On Tue, Nov 23, 201
Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 7:00 AM, Rob Atkinson
> wrote:
>> App-schema allows clients to use style sheets to deal with responses.
>> (Because its a known schema, a stylesheet can be published and used to
>> render it. I have build clients with catalogues of stylesheets for
>
App-schema allows clients to use style sheets to deal with responses.
(Because its a known schema, a stylesheet can be published and used to
render it. I have build clients with catalogues of stylesheets for
each feature type - and no way would it be worth bother with ad-hoc
flat schemas). We buil
+0 (reflecting just ignorance of the state of it, not any reservations)
Rob
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 9:47 AM, Mark Leslie wrote:
> +1 !
>
> On 13 November 2010 08:56, Andrea Aime wrote:
>> Hi,
>> here is the latest GSIP for your voting pleasure:
>> http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+55+-+Pro
Welcome to _my_ nightmare :-)!
There is a lot, a LOT, of debate at the moment about optimal form of
identifiers - see the UK Location Strategy for example. EPSG as an
entity no longer exists - making things fun...
I think we can only cope by addressing the reality - the concept we
are identifying
> This still assumes you can plan ahead a release by two weeks.
> I'm not normally in such conditions, I can have the occasional slow day,
> or the boring weekend, but I cannot foresee when that will happen.
> What I'd like to see is the possibility to cut a release with minimal
> warning instead.
This is a good idea IMHO - particularly if the process of tagging and
assigning release identifiers can be automated - automation requires
clarity of the process, which is a good thing too :-)
Andrea's experience about whats actually most reliable is really
important to learn from.
Two suggestion
+1
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 5:33 PM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:00 AM, Justin Deoliveira
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> Thanks to everyone for voting on the catalog/config refactor gsip. Now that
>> this is out of the way i would like to add the new dbconfig stuff as a
>> community m
+0 (i havent had time to think about the approach, but support the concept),
On Thu, Oct 21, 2010 at 7:49 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> I tried to indicate my +1 last week. I am excited by the technical direction.
> Jody
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 19, 2010 at 11:54 PM, Justin Deoliveira
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
Hi Eli,
this is great work, nicely described. Please attach the patch to a
JIRA task, and create those other JIRA tasks.
Previously I've done the same sort of thing using SLDs - each SLD can
have a filter and I stored a parameterised SLD - and parameterised WFS
templates for the same purpose, in
+1
it would alos allow previewing the connection with the standard UI!
Rob
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 6:50 PM, Andrea Aime
wrote:
> Hi,
> I was wondering, is there any way to make the app-schema store refer to
> an already configured GeoServer store instead of adding all in the info
> inline in th
Generally, stricter is better in terms of maintenance - there is a
good reason they found it worthwhile to improve strictness in some
place.
+0 on that basis and not wasting the work.
Rob
On Tue, Oct 12, 2010 at 10:26 AM, Justin Deoliveira
wrote:
> Hi all,
> Recently i have come across a few e
Looks like a great idea. Looking at the review they look like issues
worth addressing - particularly CITE testing and docs :-)
So, you can have a preliminary +1 once those issues are addressed.
One other question - and I may be behind the times here and its
already there - is there a hook in the
+1
On Tue, Sep 14, 2010 at 11:06 PM, Justin Deoliveira
wrote:
> Hi all,
> During the last few works I have been working on initial GML 3.2 support in
> GeoServer. I am at a point where I would like to commit to the trunk. Here
> is the proposal.
> http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+50+-+GML
sounds good to me +1
On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:28 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> As I recall you made a proposal earlier; and we decided to let the
> functionality hang out for a while we got feedback (and confidence) from
> people using it in the field. Sounds like that has occurred?
> +1
>
> Jody
+1
Perhaps possible to have something that only enables the service when
a default admin is replaced with strong password? its convenient for
developers, but no real service should allow a weak password on a well
known account name.
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 3:07 AM, Arne Kepp wrote:
> I like th
+1
Perhaps possible to have something that only enables the service when
a default admin is replaced with strong password? its convenient for
developers, but no real service should allow a weak password on a well
known account name.
On Tue, Jun 1, 2010 at 3:07 AM, Arne Kepp wrote:
> I like th
Hi,
perhaps this can be solved as a "domain and range" pattern:
the single point is the range, but the domain is the context: for
example a single point with the capital of the USA should have a
domain extent of the USA, not the point.
Will this work (or can it be fudged to work) with the exampl
ail as they make the release and find trouble.
>
> Jody
>
>
> On 15/05/2010, at 1:59 AM, Rob Atkinson wrote:
>
>> Andrea and Jody worked on some content validation services against WFS
>> - this is OS - "duckhawk" I think they called it.
>>
>> I wonder
Andrea and Jody worked on some content validation services against WFS
- this is OS - "duckhawk" I think they called it.
I wonder how far that is away from being able to execute the CITE tests?
As you pointed out, the good thing about CITE is the tests are
separated and formalised, and not hidden
)
configurations is always a major pain with trying to establish
distributed geoserver networks.
NB connecting to static files might be more relaxed - but there might
be issues with allowing cascading too.
Rob
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 4:10 PM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Rob Atkinson ha scritto:
>>
&
Have to be pretty careful rest config doesnt open SQL injection attack
paths of course :-)
On Wed, May 5, 2010 at 2:50 AM, wrote:
> +1, full agreement
>
>
> Quoting Andrea Aime :
>
>> christian.muel...@nvoe.at ha scritto:
>>> I think we should consider 2 additional facts.
>>>
>>> 1) The configu
+1 for me (I just wanted to make sure Ben was happy it was going to be
extensible for app-schema - its a great idea)
Rob
On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies
wrote:
> +1
>
> On 29/04/10 15:20, Andrea Aime wrote:
>> Andrea Aime ha scritto:
>>> Hi,
>>> since the work on the "create n
evil man!
Actually, you've pretty much described the extension to app-schema Ben
and I have discussed, and I was going to have a play with once I'd
gort a coupel of other jobs out of the way...
Our idea was to create an "inverse mapping" using substitution
parameters - which is pretty much what y
This did occur to me - but I thought I'd stick with the first issue -
can we dump sql-datastore and also have user-defined native sql
procedures exposed as filter functions?
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 12:53 PM, Ben Caradoc-Davies
wrote:
> On 19/03/10 22:22, Andrea Aime wrote:
>> during the NY OpenGe
On Tue, Mar 23, 2010 at 8:18 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Rob Atkinson ha scritto:
>>
>> I see Gabriel is in the loop - this functionality sounds similar to
>> the sql-datastore module included in the 1.6 community-schemas
>> dependencies - can we get an analysis
I see Gabriel is in the loop - this functionality sounds similar to
the sql-datastore module included in the 1.6 community-schemas
dependencies - can we get an analysis of how this new initiative
compares - and if its equivalent (or more complete) work with Ben to
ensure we have some unit tests usi
That was a good post Justin. Enjoyed readin it to the end.
Without speaking for Ben and Rini, who now has a much deeper
understanding of the way schemas are used in app-schema, I will
comment on the underlying requirements.
Firstly, the application schema imports all its dependencies
explicitly.
+1
go Andrea!
app-schema will shortly be planning the process to go for supported in
GeoTools - I think we are close to resolving the last major functional
limitation, though improved configuration support needs considering in
Geoserver. Then we'll get on to some testing on some more community
sch
Perhaps we could generate two builds - one minimal and one maximal -
with all community extensions (and a mechanism for these to be
excluded if there is a known problem with it breaking the deployable)
- this would allow people to get experience with functionality on test
installations much easier.
I fully agree with Justin on this one - its a positive to have Andrea
looking after it, but perhaps not the right signal to move something
based just on the quality of support. i think the community will
recognise that value without forcing it into extensions prematurely.
If there is an external dr
We've lived with not being able to put things onto the stable branch,
its only taken 7 years of dogged effort before we've found a customer
willing and able to fund getting things into the trunk ;-)
I think the pragmatic approach you suggest is good - default is
conservative but the PSC can overru
Would it be possible to add a link/block to all the docs - so all docs
have a link to a permanent URL for the current stable branch and trunk
versions?
This would
a) help people find the right version
b) let people know there are multiple versions
c) allow people wondering about specific functiona
yep +1
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 12:42 PM, Rob Atkinson wrote:
> yep +1
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
>> Thanks Justin.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Jody
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 2:42 AM, Justin Deoliveira
>> wrote:
yep +1
On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> Thanks Justin.
>
> +1
>
> Jody
>
> On Wed, Dec 16, 2009 at 2:42 AM, Justin Deoliveira
> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> The discussion for GSIP 44 has wound down so it would be great if the
>> PSC could officially vote on it.
>>
>> http://g
'm
> not seeing the gain clearly. Sounds like the effort is greater than the
> value to me, at least there's more compelling reasons. That is, I'm pretty
> sure client software is NOT using xml catalogs. If they wanted to use an
> OASIS Catalog though, they could just as
y weren't even serving it at all? We've got a decently big user base, so
>> we might increase the traffic there not insignificantly. I'm not opposed to
>> it, but this is the first complaint we've got about it, and I'm not
>> convinced that there's
of a performance gain for many
> clients. And I'm generally of 'if it's not broke don't fix it'.
>
> Rob Atkinson wrote:
>>
>> It should should be default ("truth in advertising")
>>
>> app-schema always uses the correct url for
It should should be default ("truth in advertising")
app-schema always uses the correct url for the configured schema
anonymous schema always uses a introspective data-store derived schema
from the WFS
clients using XML, a web technology, without a web connection need to
use the standard XML arc
Yep - thats pretty much exactly the business requirement I was
prediciting - and you've even been motivated enought to build a layer
to enforce it!
Rob
On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 2:21 AM, Just van den Broecke
wrote:
> I am very glad to see this feature moving !
>
> For what it's worth and I may not
cool - just wanted to put the idea forward early to make sure its
considered. Perhaps a note to that effect in the GSIP?
On Wed, Dec 9, 2009 at 12:35 AM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>
>
> Rob Atkinson wrote:
>>
>> I notice you talk about workspaces in one sentence then
I notice you talk about workspaces in one sentence then "a map" in
another sentence. My understanding is that workspaces are bound to
default namespaces (app-schema will get you out of that, but I've yet
to get my head around whether workspaces just become an impedence
overhead, or whether they ef
I think it would be a great idea to factor in cost for a release.
It would be even better if there was a review+release capability - so
party A could factor in party B to do a review and release (or even
Party C to do the release).
Maybe we should but a fixed fee $ (or euro :-) ) figure on a rel
> From: Andrea Aime [mailto:aa...@opengeo.org]
>> Sent: Friday, 20 November 2009 9:13 AM
>> To: Rob Atkinson
>> Cc: Geoserver-devel
>> Subject: Re: [Geoserver-devel] geoserver.org rated "Red" security risk
>> by [SEC=Unclassified] McAfee [SEC=Unclassified]
Hi
I am waiting for feedback from those more intimately involved in the
release cycle - otherwise you can have a +0 from me, based on my
ignorance of our ability to actually resource the plan.
Rob
On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:59 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Mike Pumphrey ha scritto:
>> Sorry to jump i
Just reporting from the field. McAfee "SiteAdvisor" is installed by
company policy. I'm not sure how to follow this up.
--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Simplify your r
1.6.2
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Justin Deoliveira
wrote:
> 1.6.5
>
> Andrea Aime wrote:
>> Hi,
>> following up the "Switched externals on 2.0.x" thread
>> I'd like to ask what svn client are you using, what version,
>> in particular.
>>
>> The idea is the using svn 1.5 relative externals
issues, neither of
which is 100% clear to me at the moment :-)
rob
On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 8:27 AM, Chris Holmes wrote:
>
>
> Rob Atkinson wrote:
>>
>> Just a heads-up, I think app-schemas will need to fix things on the
>> 2.0 branch - fixes for the major outstand
Just a heads-up, I think app-schemas will need to fix things on the
2.0 branch - fixes for the major outstanding issues shouldnt need to
affect any other code if they are done cleanly.
I guess this leads to a question about WFS 2.0 and GML 3.2 support
though - it would be good to roll that into 2.
Note this is a very specific test of a particula aspect,
The four basics of GML simple features level 2 profiles we dont support yet are
1) inheritance of feature types (= attribnutes from multiple namespaces)
2) ability to xlink to reference element values instead of embedded
inline encodings
3)
app-schema is stuck on GEOT-2505 for xlink and any other gml data type
attribute support. Hopefully we can get a chance to deal with this at
FOSS4G :-)
I am not aware of any proposed changes, especially any proposals "not
accepted" by the app-schema team - is there some changes proposed on a
back-
, Oct 9, 2009 at 1:00 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Rob Atkinson ha scritto:
>>
>> Is the missing piece of the puzzle that selection and classification
>> in SLD is reusing filters, but have different semantics? I can feed
>> back to the SLD revision group (which is being
Is the missing piece of the puzzle that selection and classification
in SLD is reusing filters, but have different semantics? I can feed
back to the SLD revision group (which is being proposed to be
re-formed) that this is an implementation problem, and maybe get the
next version fixed.
In the me
Any takers for Geoserver representation at the INSPIRE BoF?
I could go, but I already know a lot about INSPIRE having reviewed
some of the specs, and I dont have a specific interest in providing
support to European customers.
Rob
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 3:09 AM, Simone Giannecchini
wrote:
> I wi
data t
> o being displayed on a map, which will be the first foray into GIS for
> many of these agencies.
>
> Unfortunately, I have no resources to offer to help make it happen in
> Geoserver. It's a tight time for us. So I will see about making it
> work with what&#
ct ... no SDE or
> Oracle Spatial involved. I've read about the geometryless/locationsxy
> work in geotools that it seems never made it to supported status. And I
> see in the previous generation of docs that this can be accomplished
> with the "community schemas" bui
+1
I've added to GSIP wiki.
Rob
On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 9:08 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> Hi Andrea:
>
> This proposal has my support (+1).
>
> Jody
>
> On 23/09/2009, at 6:54 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>> GSIP 42 seems ready to go, I've incorporated latest feedback
>> from Jody about bug sta
Yes - this is the reason we renamed it "app-schemas" - the idea is the
schema is defined by a wider application that is implemented using a
services architecture.
Of course one could publish an "introspective schema" (i.e. based on
your private persistence model) as an application schema, but no-o
I agree with Andrea's perspective.
Its a tricky balancing act.
the thing that worries me a little is the process of assigning module
maintainers - either a few people get it all, and wont be able to keep
up with review load, or many people, and its hard to keep track of
who's actually active, or
My bad.
Please, if anyone is offended, make it known direct to me, I was not
intending to be offensive and am quite a friendly guy in person - its
not fair to expect Andrea to be the policeman on other's behalf.
Rob
On Sat, Sep 5, 2009 at 3:19 PM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Rob Atkinson h
Cheeky thoughts #234
With app-schema you could fix the ArcSDE persistence layer pollution -
maybe a config utility to generate the schema and autoconfig the
app-schema mapping file.
Anyone who deploys a solution relying on the technology choice behind
a standard service interface needs their head
I think 1.7 should be on the DVD.
2.0 will change too much before the conference - and should be
unencumbered to do so.
It might be possible to put it on as a "preview" to show off the new
UI concept, but maybe rather than code just some screenshots might
give people a feel.
Rob
On Wed, Aug 26,
I think its quite useful to be able to ship a self-contained example
Geoserver data dir, using property stores. Where the issue is how to
use some relatively complex piece of config, such as app-schema, or
SLDs, or examples of how to invoke various output formats, or
describing advanced query capab
s and I'll have a look to see how achievable it is
as part of the process.
Regards
Rob Atkinson
On Fri, Jul 17, 2009 at 1:06 AM, Oxenstierna
Andreas wrote:
> Hej
>
> Can the app-schema extension handle GML3 2D topology structures, like Planar
> Topology, as defined in GML3 spec chapt
I'd really, really like to fix the GML bindings before RC1 - the
forcing of GML schema defined objects onto JTS implementations that
are a very narrow interpretation is very limiting (kills hope of any
temporal data types using gml for example - you cant do a 1D position
on a temporal CRS because d
Sounds like a good idea
do we have a list of the "legacy" modules - are you talking
specifically about the old UI, or a broader cleanup?
Rob
On Tue, Jul 7, 2009 at 9:37 AM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> +1, less dependencies yay!!
>
> Andrea Aime wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I was wondering if it's a good
agreed.
it would be good to tag discussions eg [Roadmap] so that it is easier
to pay attention, likewise GSIP stuff is usually well tagged, but you
still need to pay attention quite carefully.
Rob
On Mon, Jul 6, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Justin Deoliveira ha scritto:
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
the term I have been using is 'service profile' - i.e. how a set of
users expect a service to behave
Context matches the OGC generalisation of a WMS context. It sort of
relates more to an invocation than a configuration though IMHO
so, if you take the context to be the user-centric viewpoint of
c
+1
but I'd also caution that we need to understand the workflow and
objects before committing. Justin and I had quite a long and
productive conversation in Perth about possible workflows - and how
these could be optimised for different roles (the service manager as
opposed to the data specialist
+1 from me
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 4:12 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> Hi all,
> one of the points raised quite often at the Bolsena code
> sprint was that GeoServer is not part of OSGEO, and the
> thing is seen as odd and/or harmful for both entities.
>
> That is, people ask why GeoServer is not part o
Been chatting with Jody, Justin, Gabriel and a bunch of users - we had
an idea which might be relevant here...
Role-based wizards - this would address the concerns here in two ways:
1) you show the options most relevant to the role of the user -
service deployer vs system admin vs developer vs co
well, for a start its great to see the issue being debated before
finalisation of code :-)
I'm not over the intricacies of the beast to be honest, just providing
a "sanity check".
One thing I'd point out - namespaces do not exist to disambiguate the
feature type on the server - they exist to disa
Thinking out aloud...
what if we have the same feature type being delivered by multiple
stores - for example a common gazetteer view of the different feature
types. Or sometimes we have several sub-types, and we want to provide
a single view using a supertype.
This situation does occur in practi
er vs Geology). We
are getting good support from the OpenGeo folks, and are actively
working towards trying to have a app-schema available as a core
capability in standard Geoserver releases from 2.0 on.
regards
Rob Atkinson
On Tue, Jun 9, 2009 at 10:25 PM, Just van den
Broecke wrote:
> Hi
well done Andrea.
Your ideas about which formats they apply to seems to reflect a
variety of different reasons for doing this work - illustrating
perhaps how important it is.
These reasons include:
1) making sure the server is robust - doesnt fail with OOM or
something and deliver the wrong thin
for beta1,
but they obviously would be for beta2 so thanks for laying it out.
Sorry about the late response to the roadmap - I only got something
running yesterday to give me confidence it would be worth aiming at
this round of betas.
R
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Andrea Aime wrote:
>
problems do arise, that seem to
be hard to resolve, you can always back it out in a second cut.
The unit tests for app-schema could be disabled if the build time is
an issue, since this beta is not about testing the app-schema
functionality yet.
Regards
Rob Atkinson
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 1:22 AM
Will it help if we aim for CITE compliance with 2.0, using the
app-schemas stuff.?
For people who will care about CITE, they are probably going to care
about app-schema support as well (cf. INSPIRE).
IMHO we could afford to let CITE conformance slide for pre 2.0
versions - in much the same way as
Supporting this would be a very good thing, and well worth the investment.
One slight addition to the analysis: a lot of services are exposed via
firewalls and proxies - and these set-ups are often imposed across
large swathes of government by (practically) immutable and poorly
designed service co
Hi
I've been waiting for the basic app-schema capabilities to come on
line so I can test them, after that my priority will be working out
what to do with geomtryless - which relies on sql-datastore.
I'm wondering whether I will be able to completely deprecate the
geomtryless module by either:
a)
>
> Last time I checked application-schema datastore was read only?
Yes it is, but we should discuss this as part of the next steps strategy work.
> And GeoServer must do WFS-T. What I really want is something that
> allows me to rename attributes and map types on simple features
> without:
> 1)
Oh dear
doesnt an oversimplification always cause headaches..
A couple of observations that have not yet been made...
1) A Layer is not the same as a FeatureType, semantically. Hence
assuming they are the same will always cause a problem. For example, a
RoadNetowrk may consist of roads, bridges,
s one :).
>
Manually defining namespaces during configuration is a corner case in
the long run. These will always be defined in application schemas, or
can be generated automatically without user configuration if they have
no external meaning. So, just want to avoid putting too much effort
int
On Wed, Mar 18, 2009 at 11:51 AM, Jody Garnett wrote:
> Ah you miss understand me; we are discovery the services in code form;
> as such we do not need a folder to straighten all the individual
> service files out.
>
> I expected to see a service/ folder but it is not strictly needed.
>
I wasnt c
d of clients. It should be possible to "make this up" during
FeatureType configuration, or use one extracted from the definition of
the FeatureType (the application schema case). Its not clear to me if
this is an issue - probably an implementation issue, not a directory
structure i
do it in Geoserver - Ben has been doing som work on
setting up test cases for Geoserver, but I dont think we have a easy
to use test configuration you can tweak yet - but this will be a
priority th
Rob Atkinson
On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 2:04 AM, odi wrote:
> Hi,
> I've heard that complex
> * 1.7.x into bug fixing mode
>
> As feature development winds down on 1.7.x what do people think about
> putting 1.7.x into bug-fix only mode? The motivation is to focus on 2.x
> and the features that have been brewing there for probably too long. We
> will of course still put out regular release
t lack of good metadata should not prevent anyone
> from putting real data out there.
>
Would totally agree with this. "Good" is very subjective, so get the
data out while you work out what is good in different contexts!
Rob
> Chris
>
>>
>> >
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
