Skip to content
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

Add ability to have many metadataURL in WMS Capabilities #3607

Closed
mapserver-bot opened this issue Apr 3, 2012 · 8 comments
Closed

Add ability to have many metadataURL in WMS Capabilities #3607

mapserver-bot opened this issue Apr 3, 2012 · 8 comments

Comments

@mapserver-bot
Copy link

Reporter: guillaume
Date: 2010/11/16 - 00:00
Trac URL: http://trac.osgeo.org/mapserver/ticket/3607
WMS 1.1.1 specs don't limit the number of metadataURL published throught capabilities. With increasing use of catalogs, it becomes needed that MapServer support this behaviour.
I'd suggest to add a specific function in mapows.c. I can probably write it myself, but I need to be sure that this enhancement will be accepted by the community.
Regards,

Guillaume

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: assefa
Date: 2011/03/07 - 16:56
If it is part of the specs, I think the community would accept it, specially if It does not break any backward compatibility. Is there any particular concern I am not catching?

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: assefa
Date: 2011/03/11 - 19:28
classifying bugs for the release.

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: tomkralidis
Date: 2011/03/16 - 16:37
How would this look at the user level? Currently, we use LAYER.METADATA/ows_metadata_* to output one MetadataURL per layer. I would initially think a delimited list would help here, but this would break backward compatibility.

To get a better idea, do you have a use case that would demonstrate how a catalog would harvest / merge multiple metadata for one layer in a catalog?

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: guillaume
Date: 2011/03/16 - 16:46
Hi Tom,

Thanks for your feedback. Actually the main goal is to be able to point to different "views" of the metadata document, which would basically be text/xml, text/html application/pdf eventually.
The harvesting service should be able to ask for the appropriate representation, while referencing the others for publication convenience.
The need comes from my working mate who is a GeoNetwork dev. I've asked him to come back here for further input.
Best regards
Guillaume

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: fxp
Date: 2011/03/16 - 19:44
Why do we need more than one metadataURL element ? UC :

  • a web WMS client could use the metadataURL with type=text/html to add a link in a layer tree or adding footnotes for layers in a printable PDF map for example,
  • and a catalogue could harvest the service !GetCapabilities document and get layer metadata using metadataURL with type=text/xml to get the full XML document to index, search, ...

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: tomkralidis
Date: 2011/03/22 - 13:38
Assefa and I spoke about this last week at the code sprint. I can't see how this could be implemented without breaking backwards compability.

If you have any examples, that would be great.

@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

Author: guillaume
Date: 2011/03/22 - 14:22
Not sure, but I remember that all the xxx_url metadata were parsed by a single function (same one for legend, metadata...) which was looking for the keywords in MapServer METADATA and then parsed the associated _url _format and others. Actually it would be enough to loop through instead. I don't think it would break any backward compatibility.

@ghost ghost assigned tomkralidis Apr 5, 2012
@mapserver-bot
Copy link
Author

This is an automated comment

This issue has been closed due to lack of activity. This doesn't mean the issue is invalid, it simply got no attention within the last year. Please reopen with missing/relevant information if still valid.

Typically, issues fall in this state for one of the following reasons:

  • Hard, impossible or not enough information to reproduce
  • Missing test case
  • Lack of a champion with interest and/or funding to address the issue

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants