-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 81
Commit
This commit does not belong to any branch on this repository, and may belong to a fork outside of the repository.
added list of non webby ogc standards. Solves issue #1057.
- Loading branch information
Showing
1 changed file
with
57 additions
and
0 deletions.
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,57 @@ | ||
The following is a list of OGC standards wich are well-deployed in the geospatial community but less so on the Web aka 'not yet Web-friendly enough'. In the roadmap I listed these under 'Features not covered by ongoing work' section, for now (we might consider naming this section differently or creating a new one). | ||
|
||
(There are many more OGC standards, but most of these are not especially meant to be used on the web. I'm not listing, for example, standards for data exchange by download/import/export or standards that are conceptual models.) | ||
|
||
'Webby' = following the fundamental concepts of the [architecture of the Web][1] | ||
|
||
Criteria in general for ending up on this list: | ||
- It uses http only as a transport protocol. In contrast, standards which use http as an interface are considered 'Webby'. | ||
- It's been replaced with something that's designed to be more web friendly. | ||
- It's too complicated to be used in a Web context. | ||
|
||
## Web Map Service (WMS) | ||
Rationale: Using http only as a transport protocol, sending XML messages back and forth. | ||
|
||
## Web Map Tile Service (WMTS) | ||
Rationale: Using http only as a transport protocol, sending XML messages back and forth. | ||
|
||
## Web Coverage Service (WCS) | ||
Rationale: Using http only as a transport protocol, sending XML messages back and forth. | ||
|
||
## Web Coverage Processing Service | ||
Rationale: Using http only as a transport protocol, sending XML messages back and forth. | ||
|
||
## Catalogue Service (CSW) | ||
Rationale: Using http only as a transport protocol, sending XML messages back and forth. | ||
|
||
## Web Map Context | ||
Rationale: Using http only as a transport protocol, sending XML messages back and forth. | ||
|
||
## Web Processing Service | ||
Rationale: Using http only as a transport protocol, sending XML messages back and forth. | ||
|
||
## Web Service Common | ||
Rationale: Using http only as a transport protocol, sending XML messages back and forth. | ||
|
||
## Sensor Observation Service | ||
Rationale: Using http only as a transport protocol, sending XML messages back and forth. | ||
|
||
## Sensor Planning Service | ||
Rationale: Using http only as a transport protocol, sending XML messages back and forth. | ||
|
||
## Observations and Measurements GML encoding | ||
Rationale: Superseded by SSN. | ||
|
||
## Timeseries (Profile of Observations and Measurements and the XML Encoding) | ||
Rationale: The XML encoding is too complex and verbose - not lightweight enough to conduct, for example, enhanced (near) real-time operations involving moving objects, via the Web. | ||
|
||
## Moving Features | ||
Rationale: The XML encoding is too complex and verbose - not lightweight enough to conduct, for example, enhanced (near) real-time operations involving moving objects, via the Web. | ||
|
||
## IndoorGML | ||
Rationale: GML encoding is not web friendly. A JSON encoding could be created from the conceptual model, but we suspect it’s currently too complicated for that. This standard is potentially relevant for mobile web applications, though. | ||
|
||
## CityGML | ||
Rationale: GML encoding is not web friendly. | ||
|
||
[1]: https://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/ |