Paul, mixing local and remote operations sounds way cool and definitely like the way to go.. How are local operations listed to the user, and inputs and outputs defined? Could you point me to where I can learn about uDig "Operations"?
Jonas On Sun, 2006-03-19 at 15:35 -0800, Paul Ramsey wrote: > Any thought to being able to expose WPS as an Operation? One of the > things I am looking forward to is getting some of our client-side > processing stuff available in uDig as Operations, and a WPS can be > considered a remote instance of an Operation. Along with a chaining > UI for operations, this starts to get very cool, with client-side > operations interacting with server-side ones, all as peers. Sort of > extends the uDig "a layer is a layer is a layer" paradigm into the > processing side as well: "an operation is an operation is an operation". > > Paul > > On 19-Mar-06, at 2:05 PM, Jonas Johansson wrote: > > > On Fri, 2006-03-17 at 13:51 +0200, Jody Garnett wrote: > >> > >> I think so, let me try one: > >> 1. user adds a WPS url to a preference page > >> IDEA: Preference Page > >> 2. Create a Web Process context menu for WFS FeaturesType (am I > >> correct > >> in understanding that WPS can only be used when chained with a > >> WFS? Or > >> can we upload GML as to the WPS and get an answer back?) > >> IDEA: Context Menu Contribution > >> 3. A dialog pops up where the user can choose what process to > >> "Execute", > >> uDig creates a temporary layer to "catch" these features as they > >> come back > >> IDEA: Dialog > >> 4. WPS goes chunk chunk chunk on the data > >> 5. SPS Cient gobbles up the GML as it comes back, and provides a > >> stream > >> of normal geotools features > >> 6. uDig takes those feature and puts them into a temporary layer > >> as they > >> are produced. > >> IDEA: Creating a tempoary layer > >> 7. user can do normal stuff with the produced data, including save it > >> out to a file. > >> > >> Jody > >> > > > > I'm thinking it could also be nice using WPSs in the uDig workbench by > > importing them in a Catalog manner, very similar to how WFS with its > > layers are now imported (except a Layer is instead a Process). Would > > that be a bad solution? > > > > This would need some new stuff: > > * WPS Catalog View (a parallel to the current Catalog View, but for > > external processing services, WPS or any other similar standard) > > * WPS Catalog View Context Menu > > * Processes View (a parallel to the current Layers View) > > * Processes View Context Menu > > * Specify Inputs and Outputs Dialog > > > > The user imports WPSs in the "WPS Catalog View" -> selects a > > process in > > its tree -> opens the "WPS Catalog View Context Menu" -> selects > > "Add to > > workbench". The user selects the newly added process in the "Processes > > View" -> opens the "Processes View Context Menu" -> selects "Specify > > Inputs and Outputs" -> specifies inputs and how outputs should be > > handled in the "Specify Inputs and Outputs Dialog". The user, again, > > opens the "Processes View Context Menu" -> selects "Execute process". > > > > Jonas > > > > _______________________________________________ > > User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig) > > http://udig.refractions.net > > http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel > > _______________________________________________ > User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig) > http://udig.refractions.net > http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel _______________________________________________ User-friendly Desktop Internet GIS (uDig) http://udig.refractions.net http://lists.refractions.net/mailman/listinfo/udig-devel
