[mapserver-dev] Call for vote on RFC 75: INSPIRE view service support

[Stephan Meißl]

On Mon, 2012-03-05 at 09:35 -0500, Daniel Morissette wrote: 
> On 12-02-05 4:31 PM, Stephan Meißl wrote:
> > Hi devs,
> >
> > I would like to call for a vote on RFC 75: "INSPIRE view service
> > support" [1]. There's also a pretty much advanced sandbox implementation
> > available [2] for review.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Stephan
> >
> > [1] http://mapserver.org/development/rfc/ms-rfc-75.html
> > [2] http://trac.osgeo.org/mapserver/browser/sandbox/inspire_soc2011
> >
> 
> Sorry for taking so long to get back to you on this.
> 
> One question that crossed my mind in reviewing the RFC is about the 
> multi-language support. The "inspire" in the name of the 
> wms_inspire_languages metadata suggests that it would be of use only 
> when INSPIRE stuff is enabled.
> 
> Since multi-language support could be of general use for all OWS specs, 
> I would suggest changing the metadata name to "[wms|ows]_languages" and 
> ensuring it can work independently of the rest of the INSPIRE stuff.
> 
> A future enhancement could be to implement multi-language support for 
> all OWS specs, but I realize that this is outside the scope of the 
> current INSPIRE-related RFC work.
> 
> Other than that the rest of the RFC seems fine to me (even if I admit 
> that I didn't review everything in details), so I'd be +1 once we 
> address/discuss the language issue above.
> 
> Thank you for taking this on
> 
> Daniel


Hi Daniel,

many thanks for your positive feedback.

I very much agree that a more general approach for multi-language
support would be great. I quickly reviewed the code and don't find any
obstacle. Thus I updated the sandbox changing the metadata name to
"xxx_languages". Note that only certain metadata names support the
language extension mechanism (e.g. "wms_title.eng") as written in the
RFC which btw. is also updated to reflect the change. Should I add a
ticket for the future enhancement to implement multi-language support
for all OWS specs?

If there are no further objections I'd go ahead an merge the sandbox to
trunk.

cu
Stephan