Date: 2 de noviembre de 2006 20:44:25 GMT+01:00
Subject: Re: [wfs-dev] name change
Well,
Not quite a FULL WFS without transactions.
The WFS includes the capabilities and filter capabilities to allow
servers to declare what the are capable of.
This means that servers can declare that they support very little. For
example, the following filter capabilities:
<ogc:Spatial_Capabilities>
<ogc:GeometryOperand>gml:Point</ogc:GeometryOperand>
</ogc:GeometryOperands>
<ogc:SpatialOperators>
<ogc:SpatialOperator name="BBOX" />
</ogc:SpatialOperators>
</ogc:Spatial_Capabilities/>
<ogc:Id_Capabilities>
<ogc:EID />
</ogc:Id_Capabilities>
</ogc:Filter_Capabilities>
indicates that this server only supports BBOX on gml:Point types.
So the most complex request you could form (on as single feature type)
would be something like:
I would prefer that this work (WFS Simple I mean) be rolled back into
the WFS specification as a level 0 conformance class rather than having
two independent specifications that do similar things ... even if this
means making GML a preferred but not mandatory output format for the
GetFeature operation.
The WFS already allows other formats, other than GML, to be supported so
something like KML is well within the scope of the current spec..
Ciao.
Raj Singh wrote:
In the WFS specification the idea of a 'Basic WFS' is mentioned that
pertains to a full WFS that is read-only--no transactional support.
This is quite different from the intent of this effort, so the
working name has been changed to 'WFS Simple'.
---
Raj
_______________________________________________
wfs-dev mailing list
--
Panagiotis (Peter) A. Vretanos CubeWerx Inc.
"If you want to make an apple pie from scratch, you must first
create the universe." -- Carl Sagan
_______________________________________________
wfs-dev mailing list