edgar soldin wrote: > > On 24.04.2013 11:41, Alexis "Agemen" wrote: > > Le 24/04/2013 11:10, edgar.sol...@web.de a écrit : > >> On 23.04.2013 22:52, Michaël Michaud wrote: > >>>> I've changed some things related to the default wms version we find > >>>> : I > >>>>> really prefer to keep the highest one if nothing is given from the user. > >>>>> I've made some changes in WMService so that it can work. I've > >>>>> tried to retrieve the getCapabilities document only once for > performance purpose. > >>>>> I've split the initialize method in three, consequently. Another > >>>>> minor change is that I add a "?" at the end of the input URL in > >>>>> order to be more resistant to user input :-) > >>> Nice improvement, I'll try to synchronize OpenJUMP. > >> he stumbled over the bounding box axis issue inbetween, so i doubt he > will stick to the highest version first decision. the question mark was also > reverted afaiu as the user might give a query string with the url. > >> > >> so far i see no need for both changes. > >> > >> ..ede > >> > > hi, > > > > The query string can basically be kept by doing a more accurate test. > > For instance by searching for it in the input URL. If it is there, we > > can then check for a final & and then go on. I've done that thanks to > > Jukka comment on this, and it seems to be working. (most of the work > > as been made on the OrbisGIS side, no change in the WMS client unless > > the said test). > > what exactly is your rationale to add the "?". how does it make anything > more robust? what do you need the questioonmark for, if there is no query > string?
There is always a query string in WMS but it is normally not shown for users. Clients tend to take the base URL and complete it silently with well-known KVP parameters. OpenJUMP starts the discussion with WMS server as http://base_url[?or&]SERVICE=WMS&REQUEST=GetCapabilities If there is ? or & after the base_url depens on the base URL itself. If it already contain ? the ending character must be & > > > Considering the work made by Michaël, the axis order problem seems to > > be less painful... I've made some tests and it seems to be working. > > That's > > as long as the crs list is up to date and not faulty somewhere. nobody can > guarantee that. a proper solution would need a periodically updated EPSG > database. I believe Michaël followed my hint and copied the list from Mapserver sources or generated an own list from EPSG database. > > said, we will probably stick with the highest version rather than > > defaulting to 1.1.1. Version 1.3.0 is the current standard for WMS. I > > did you read the link i sent around? > http://dmorissette.blogspot.de/2012/12/dont-upgrade-to-wms-130-unless- > you.html Alexis may decide what he wants to do. We can help him and emphasize that because of the axis order thing WMS 1.3.0 is not painless and version 1.1.1 is more reliable. This is especially true is one starts to use WMS with advanced SLD files which contain spatial filters because the axis order of coordinates must be handled correctly also in the GML that is used inside SLD. But if there is a button for selecting a desired version then it will be OK. > > > really prefer the idea to let the user force the requested version. > > Moreover, there is no guarantee WMS 1.1.1 is implemented on the > > requested server. > > that's why you'd probe and choose the next best option, according to your > list and probe again Chapter 6.1.4 describes what was the meaning of OGC. > >That means that if the version is not explicitly stated in the > >getCapabilities request (i.e. not explicitly given by the > >user/caller), the client will try to connect to a WMS 1.3.0 *only* > >server with the 1.1.1 protocol. I don't know how this could work. > > it obviously wont ;) If the document above is followed it will work: 2b) If the client request is for a version lower than any of those known to the server, then the server shall send the lowest version it knows. "Hi WMS, I would prefer to use 1.1.1 - Sorry, I can only 1.3.0 - Well, let 's try with 1.3.0 then" > >I > > think it's safer to query the server before. > totally, but if you occur a server supporting both 1.3 and 1.1 , 1.1 is the > better > way to go as explained in the link above. There is nothing that is better in WMS 1.3.0 but the whole version is only about the principle of the meaning of X and Y. Next thing to happen is to create an OGC-JSON for the same reason http://lists.geojson.org/pipermail/geojson-geojson.org/2013-April/000706.html -Jukka Rahkonen- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Try New Relic Now & We'll Send You this Cool Shirt New Relic is the only SaaS-based application performance monitoring service that delivers powerful full stack analytics. Optimize and monitor your browser, app, & servers with just a few lines of code. Try New Relic and get this awesome Nerd Life shirt! http://p.sf.net/sfu/newrelic_d2d_apr _______________________________________________ Jump-pilot-devel mailing list Jump-pilot-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jump-pilot-devel
