On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Chris Holmes wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>> Anyways, if I understand the document properly you also intend to add
> >>> support for SLD 1.1/SE 1.1 to GeoServer?
> >>
> >> It is not 100% yet if the funding is there but ye
+1 on this strategy
its perfectly natural to have "levels of conformance" - and at some
point someone will probably want to define limited functionality
profiles of these specs - so it should be possible to prioritise
improvements against such requirements if and when they emerge,
otherwise be dri
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 3:17 PM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Chris Holmes wrote:
> >
> >>>
> >>> Anyways, if I understand the document properly you also intend to add
> >>> support for SLD 1.1/SE 1.1 to GeoServer?
> >>
> >> It is not 100% yet if the funding is there but ye
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 8:50 PM, Chris Holmes wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Anyways, if I understand the document properly you also intend to add
>>> support for SLD 1.1/SE 1.1 to GeoServer?
>>
>> It is not 100% yet if the funding is there but yes, at least a
>> partial implementation. The first pass of this wi
>
>> Anyways, if I understand the document properly you also intend to add
>> support for SLD 1.1/SE 1.1 to GeoServer?
>>
> It is not 100% yet if the funding is there but yes, at least a
> partial implementation. The first pass of this will mostly likely just be a
> parser / encoder for SE. That is
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 5:24 AM, Gabriel Roldán wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 13:18 +0100, Andrea Aime wrote:
> > On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Justin Deoliveira
> wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > > Recently some fellow developers have started to look at implementing
> wms 1.3
> > > support in geoserv
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 5:18 AM, Andrea Aime wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Justin Deoliveira
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > Recently some fellow developers have started to look at implementing wms
> 1.3
> > support in geoserver. So I wanted to spark some design and general
> > discussion abou
Great, thanks for the clarification guys, I knew i did not have it right.
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 4:53 AM, Gabriel Roldán wrote:
> It looks like EPSG ones are lat/lon for the WMS 1.3 spec.
>
> Check the following excerpt from page 16, section 6.7.3.1. My read is it
> basically says axis order sh
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 4:24 AM, Gabriel Roldán wrote:
> ok, thinking about it looks like multiple schema locations may not be
> necessary at all, since an extension point may be confined to contribute
> extensions for a single schema and the schema should import anything
> else needed sorry f
On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 13:18 +0100, Andrea Aime wrote:
> On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Justin Deoliveira
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > Recently some fellow developers have started to look at implementing wms 1.3
> > support in geoserver. So I wanted to spark some design and general
> > discussion abo
On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 2:31 AM, Justin Deoliveira wrote:
> Hi all,
> Recently some fellow developers have started to look at implementing wms 1.3
> support in geoserver. So I wanted to spark some design and general
> discussion about how to go about implementation. I wrote down some quick
> though
It looks like EPSG ones are lat/lon for the WMS 1.3 spec.
Check the following excerpt from page 16, section 6.7.3.1. My read is it
basically says axis order shall be respected and EPSG geographic CRS's
are latitude/longitude:
"The Layer CRS has two axes, denoted x and y. The x axis is the first
a
Hi Justin,
wrt axis order, the description does not seem right to me.
"The WMS 1.3 spec itself only mandates support for two default geographic
projections. Named CRS:84 and EPSG:4326 respectively. Both of these define
the "regular" axis order of longitude, latitude or x,y."
EPSG:4326 should be
ok, thinking about it looks like multiple schema locations may not be
necessary at all, since an extension point may be confined to contribute
extensions for a single schema and the schema should import anything
else needed sorry for the confusion, I'll grab some early morning
coffee now and sh
Thanks for putting this up Justin. Looks very promising.
Just a quick note, I think the ExtendedCapabilitiesProvider interface
getSchemaLocation() method should return multiple schema locations, and
it doesn't say which namespace the schema location is for, so I guess
you mean it returns the compl
Hi all,
Recently some fellow developers have started to look at implementing wms 1.3
support in geoserver. So I wanted to spark some design and general
discussion about how to go about implementation. I wrote down some quick
thoughts on this wiki page:
http://geoserver.org/display/GEOS/WMS-1.3
16 matches
Mail list logo
