Many of these don't make any sense to me, if you ask me my opinion. We
should be using the list of OGC standards and entering them into
wordpress, and not allowing editors to edit/add new non-standards. But
that is all my own opinion :) Then we can link to these standards. As
of now anyone can create a 'standard' and post it on the beta site,
seems very odd to me.
Is my opinion here too strong? For now I chose just to edit the
descriptions for all of these 'standards', valid or not.
What do you prefer?
-jeff
On 2017-08-22 1:59 PM, Jody Garnett wrote:
Thanks jeff, I just noticed that work had been done in the GeoServer
meeting :) We also spotted one standard "OGC" which does not make sense.
Do you think it is worthwhile linking to these standards?
--
Jody Garnett
On 22 August 2017 at 09:42, Jeff McKenna <jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com
<mailto:jmcke...@gatewaygeomatics.com>> wrote:
Since we have so many website 'editors' (currently 84), please if
you do create a new "standard" (double-quote use is on purpose, as
many of these are not actual standards) when you are editing your
project page, please let me know and I will edit the new standard
and add a description - I have just went through all of these
"standards" and set descriptions for each of the 27 "standards".
For example:
(WPS)
will now appear on the project pages as:
Web Processing Service (WPS)
This consistency makes it much easier to read for new users to our site.
thanks all!
-jeff
_______________________________________________
Discuss mailing list
Discuss@lists.osgeo.org
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss
