Hi Andreas, thanks for your response. I've just taken a look what you 
suggest and it seems very promising. Maybe is just what I needed from 
the beginning.

best,
amaneiro

On 08/04/11 16:25, Andreas Hocevar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I haven't looked at your implementation, but using the layer keywords to 
> build a hierarchical structure is the wrong way. The GetCapabilities response 
> has a hierarchy of layers already, which is supported by the 
> WMSCapabilitiesLoader.
>
> To build this hierarchy with GeoServer, you can configure the "Default WMS 
> Path" of your layers. See 
> http://docs.geoserver.org/latest/en/user/webadmin/data/layers.html
>
> Regards,
> Andreas.
>
> On Apr 8, 2011, at 09:50 , Andrés Maneiro wrote:
>
>> Hi, just a ping to see if someone could review the patch and say something.
>>
>> amaneiro
>>
>> On 06/04/11 13:14, Andrés Maneiro wrote:
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> I'm playing with geoext to build a geoportal. One of the features I need
>>> is to show a panel with the layers available from the server, so I have
>>> used WMSCapabilitiesLoader.
>>>
>>> Once done so, I felt like want to show those layers into groups. After
>>> researching a bit I couldn't see any straight option (at openlayers or
>>> geoext) to do it. I didn't want to write down the name of the layers and
>>> groups as arrays in the code: I'd rather prefer to configure that in a
>>> dinamically way, for the user make the changes she wanted without having
>>> to change the code.
>>>
>>> So, I built a new class called WMSCapabilitiesWithLayersInGroupsLoader,
>>> which build the tree by creating the groups and appending to then the
>>> layers. The user links layers and groups by writing the name of a group
>>> in the keywords field for each layer (I did it be means of geoserver
>>> user panel).
>>>
>>> For sure, the patch could be improved. Also tested with other servers (I
>>> did only tested with geoserver and I don't know if keywords is a field
>>> from the standard or a geoserver exclusive feature).
>>>
>>> Your thoughts on this matter would be very valuable. Is another way to
>>> do it easier? Would be possible to integrate this patch within geoext?
>>> Which are the main problems to do so?
>>>
>>> best,
>>> amaneiro
>> _______________________________________________
>> Dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://www.geoext.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
Dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.geoext.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dev

Reply via email to