Hello, Le mercredi 11 juin 2014 10:25:36, Jürgen E. Fischer a écrit : > Hi Andreas, > > On Wed, 11. Jun 2014 at 08:39:11 +0200, Andreas Neumann wrote: > > It is true that in some cases we need to improve to be more standards > > compliant. This is a group effort. Everybody can contribute. Removing > > GetPrint from GetCapabilities, or implementing in a standard compliant > > way, would help. We could still have it listed in GetProjectSettings. > > It's disputable if the current way is not compliant. > > Changing that might break clients that query the capabilities for the > presense of GetPrint if we'd applied a (less-disputable ;)) compliant > prefix (ie. GetPrint to qgis:GetPrint). > > Note that this would only apply to the name of the operation element in > capabilities, the actual request wouldn't need to changed. > > So it's unclear to me if there are actually any clients that would break.
I do not think a lot of clients are relying on getprint being in capabilities. > At least some already use GetProjectSettings, others might just imply > GetPrint without checking GetCapabilities - both groups wouldn't be > affected. Probably the vast majority of users. > The clients that check capabilities would just need to look for > qgis:GetPrint instead or alternatively of GetPrint - and that should just > be a trivial change, when 2.4 is deployed. > > Also there are probably not that many clients around that actually use > GetPrint. +1 Thanks for your reasonable, pragmatic and thoughtful contributions. Vincent _______________________________________________ Qgis-user mailing list Qgis-user@lists.osgeo.org http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user