-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 60
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Feature Editing #47
Comments
|
Where are we on this? |
|
Sort in bullet points:
The blockers at this point are:
I'm in favor of moving this forward but want to make sure it's a solution that fits how people are putting things together in 2019. |
|
I could be wrong, but I think there is quite some time before WFS 3.0 is available, so any solution in the shorter term may need to be based on the existing standard. Edit: here is the URL for the location where it (now renamed OGC-API) is being developed: |
|
A lot of the base code needed for editing features is there. We can draw/edit features on vector layers. This can be done in the original layer or the features can be selected from a source layer and brought into a temporary layer (generally the results layer, but could be others). The user can upload/download features from a vector layer to/from GeoMoose as GeoJSON or KML. I'm not sure if we have attribute or style editing in GeoMoose 3.x yet. The part that is currently left as an exercise for the reader is getting this back into a database. This could be done with a custom service (JS in GeoMoose) and something on the server to go between HTTP and the database. Ideally the HTTP part would be some open standard API with a FOSS implementation and growing mindshare, but I'm not sure what that would be at the moment. |
|
Hmm. Reminds me of GM 1.6 (not that it's a bad thing)... |
|
One thing I liked about the original vector editing was the performance when dealing with lots of vectors. The layer with all the features was rendered with WMS, the user identified/selected a feature (or multiple features?) for editing, the geometry of only that feature was retrieved and presented for editing. Good stuff. |
|
Is TinyOWS non-functional? If it still works, maybe incorporating it as a placeholder until the new standard is operational is the best path... |
|
My worry is that TinyOWS is not-maintained. The current OGC spec only specifies the way to read features and not the way to write or update them. I think tagging this to 4.x is likely the best way to go. I don't want this to fall off the list but it's definitely a feature that could use some sponsorship. |
|
For the record, some much-needed recent activity for TinyOWS: MapServer/tinyows#94 Also, please keep in mind HTTPS support, in your GeoMoose-WFS-T testing (MapServer/tinyows#93). |
|
So the current TinyOWS (including PR 94) will not work with a https request? |
|
I think it needs re-testing, and then update the ticket with test results at MapServer/tinyows#93 |
|
see PR #620 |
This provides an enumerated type for editing.
```
...
<property type="select" label="Encoding" default="dec">
<option value="dec">Decimal</option>
<option value="oct">Octal</option>
<option value="hex">Hexadecimal</option>
</property>
...
```
refs: geomoose#47
Implement WFS-T layers.
We'll use TinyOWS as the example WFS-T server but GeoServer should be tested as well.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: