Justin,

did you submit your GSIP 61 findings to the OGC WFS/FES SWG? It has 
started meeting. The web form is below (the link provided by Simon). I 
am sure the group will appreciate your input.

I am an observer on the SWG. I have raised the startIndex issue (clarify 
zero or one-based index).

Kind regards,
Ben.

On 26/10/11 14:43, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
> That would be great!
>
> On 26/10/11 14:10, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>> Sure I will try to gather my thoughts on this... at a client site this
>> week so might not be until end of week.
>

>> On 25/10/11 15:35, Ben Caradoc-Davies wrote:
>>> If you have time to submit a couple of bullet points and a link to your
>>> GSIP 61 page on the OGC web form below, you will ensure that the OGC SWG
>>> are at least aware of your findings as the principal implementer of
>>> GeoServer WFS 2.0. I suspect that they will find your work most useful.
>>>
>>> If you lack the time and are willing to risk my misinterpretation,
>>> please let me know and I will submit your findings on behalf of the
>>> project.
>>>
>>> Kind regards,
>>> Ben.
>>>
>>> On 25/10/11 15:26, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
>>>> Similar issues have been brought up on the wfs-dev list I believe...
>>>> and the spec writers have been open to amending them. There is also a
>>>> constraint in the capabilities document in which one can declare
>>>> whether paging is transaction safe... and we set that to false... so
>>>> perhaps the spec is poorly worded perhaps. Regardless though it seems
>>>> pointless if all the legitimate implementations of wfs 2.0 don't
>>>> implement it.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 4:15 AM, Ben
>>>> Caradoc-Davies<[email protected]> wrote:
>>>> Justin, perhaps you could submit a WFS 2 change request to encourage
>>>> OGC to change the spec to what you were able to reasonably implement? :-D
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -------- Original Message --------
>>>> Subject: RE: GeoServer WFS 2.0 limitations
>>>> Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2011 17:39:58 +0800
>>>> From: Simon Cox
>>>>
>>>> Submit a WFS 2.0 Change Request to explicitly relax this requirement.
>>>> https://portal.opengeospatial.org/public_ogc/change_request.php
>>>> It's just a web form.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ben Caradoc-Davies
>>>> Sent: Monday, 24 October 2011 4:56 PM
>>>> To: Simon Cox
>>>> Subject: GeoServer WFS 2.0 limitations
>>>>
>>>> FYI
>>>>
>>>> http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/GSIP+61+-+WFS+2.0
>>>> "WFS 2.0 adds the ability to page results of a GetFeature request via
>>>> the startIndex and maxFeatures parameters. The WFS specification
>>>> actually implies that a service must maintain consistent paging results
>>>> in the light of transactions, but such a restriction is very difficult
>>>> to implement and implies that the server be able to store large results
>>>> in memory, or maintain database transactions between requests which goes
>>>> against the stateless nature of WFS all together. For this reason we
>>>> ignore this requirement in our implementation."
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Ben Caradoc-Davies<[email protected]>
>>>> Software Engineer
>>>> CSIRO Earth Science and Resource Engineering
>>>> Australian Resources Research Centre
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Justin Deoliveira
>>>> OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
>>>> Enterprise support for open source geospatial.

-- 
Ben Caradoc-Davies <[email protected]>
Software Engineer
CSIRO Earth Science and Resource Engineering
Australian Resources Research Centre

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keep Your Developer Skills Current with LearnDevNow!
The most comprehensive online learning library for Microsoft developers
is just $99.99! Visual Studio, SharePoint, SQL - plus HTML5, CSS3, MVC3,
Metro Style Apps, more. Free future releases when you subscribe now!
http://p.sf.net/sfu/learndevnow-d2d
_______________________________________________
Geoserver-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

Reply via email to