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

Wrong boundingbox values in GetCapabilities for empty layers #15120

Closed
qgib opened this issue Apr 29, 2012 · 8 comments
Closed

Wrong boundingbox values in GetCapabilities for empty layers #15120

qgib opened this issue Apr 29, 2012 · 8 comments
Labels
Bug Either a bug report, or a bug fix. Let's hope for the latter! Server Related to QGIS server

Comments

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor

qgib commented Apr 29, 2012

Author Name: zicke - (zicke -)
Original Redmine Issue: 5520
Affected QGIS version: master
Redmine category:qgis_server
Assignee: Paul Blottiere


For layers without any feature the bbox calculation for the GetCapabilities request is wrong. The result is some 'nonsense' bbox value. You can still use the wms layer with a correct bbox but QGIS fails to load groups (or the whole wms 'tree') with empty layers since the group bbox is wrong too.


Related issue(s): #18798 (relates)
Redmine related issue(s): 10379


@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Sep 4, 2012

Author Name: Paolo Cavallini (@pcav)


  • fixed_version_id was configured as Version 2.0.0

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Feb 6, 2014

Author Name: Bernhard Ströbl (Bernhard Ströbl)


I raised this bug in priority because it is annoying
underlying data change and a layer may become empty (no features in it) in the course of time as well as refilling again
I my case this box is returned:
@<EX_GeographicBoundingBox>
6.42191
6.42191
89.9946
89.9946
</EX_GeographicBoundingBox>@

Proposed solution: if layer delivers a bbox larger than the bbox set in the OWS server tab the bbox set in OWS server is returned (IMHO it does not make sense to have layers propagating larger bboxes than the project does)


  • priority_id was changed from Normal to High
  • fixed_version_id was changed from Version 2.0.0 to Future Release - High Priority
  • operating_system was changed from Ubuntu to any

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Feb 12, 2014

Author Name: Jürgen Fischer (@jef-n)


  • subject was changed from Wrong boundingbox values in GetCapabilities for empy layers to Wrong boundingbox values in GetCapabilities for empty layers

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Oct 5, 2015

Author Name: Jürgen Fischer (@jef-n)


  • assigned_to_id removed Marco Hugentobler

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Jan 4, 2017

Author Name: Giovanni Manghi (@gioman)


  • priority_id was changed from High to Normal
  • operating_system was changed from any to

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Apr 30, 2017

Author Name: Giovanni Manghi (@gioman)


  • regression was configured as 0
  • easy_fix was configured as 0

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Oct 18, 2018

Author Name: Paul Blottiere (Paul Blottiere)


  • assigned_to_id was configured as Paul Blottiere

@qgib
Copy link
Contributor Author

qgib commented Oct 24, 2018

Author Name: Paul Blottiere (Paul Blottiere)


Applied in changeset da22f7c.


  • done_ratio was changed from 0 to 100
  • status_id was changed from Open to Closed

@qgib qgib closed this as completed Oct 24, 2018
@qgib qgib added Bug Either a bug report, or a bug fix. Let's hope for the latter! Server Related to QGIS server labels May 24, 2019
@qgib qgib added this to the Future Release - High Priority milestone May 24, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Bug Either a bug report, or a bug fix. Let's hope for the latter! Server Related to QGIS server
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant