<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.Shkpostityyli17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:70.85pt 2.0cm 70.85pt 2.0cm;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="FI" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">Hi,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">After reading the discussion from the github issue (which is discussion forum that I do not like a lot as a pure Mapserver user) I would say that
principally you seem to be right with it. However, when it comes to interoperability I consider it would be better to discuss first with Geoserver, TinyOWS and deegree and ArcGIS developersAll these WFS brands seem to send multiCurves and multiSurfaces. I
base this from the deegree side on the 5 year old OpenLayers ticket and from Geoserver, TinyOWS and ArcGIS side on these<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a href="http://demo.opengeo.org/geoserver/wfs?service=wfs&version=1.1.0&request=getfeature&typename=topp:states&">http://demo.opengeo.org/geoserver/wfs?service=wfs&version=1.1.0&request=getfeature&typename=topp:states&</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a href="http://hip.latuviitta.org/cgi-bin/tinyows?service=wfs&version=1.1.0&request=getfeature&typename=lv:editable_multilines">http://hip.latuviitta.org/cgi-bin/tinyows?service=wfs&version=1.1.0&request=getfeature&typename=lv:editable_multilines</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><a href="http://gtkdata.gtk.fi/arcgis/services/GTKWFS/MapServer/WFSServer?service=wfs&versio=1.1.1&request=GetFeature&typename=GTKWFS:Suomen_metallogeeninen_kartta&maxfeatures=10">http://gtkdata.gtk.fi/arcgis/services/GTKWFS/MapServer/WFSServer?service=wfs&versio=1.1.1&request=GetFeature&typename=GTKWFS:Suomen_metallogeeninen_kartta&maxfeatures=10</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">ArcGIS, Geoserver and deegree are much more common WFS servers than Mapserver. If Mapserver alone goes to strict simple features no WFS client
developer can still cease supporting multiSurfaces etc. BTW. is it really so that OpenLayers can’t read topp:states from Geoservers with WFS 1.1.0? Of course this change in Mapserver should not break any client and I am not against it per se. I just believe
that “Simple features profile” does not work in practice. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D">-Jukka Rahkonen-<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"">Stéphane Brunner wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Hello everybody,<br>
<br>
Some hours ago I create an Issue and a Pull Request for better support of the simple feature profile:<br>
</span><a href="https://github.com/mapserver/mapserver/issues/4977">https://github.com/mapserver/mapserver/issues/4977</a><br>
<a href="https://github.com/mapserver/mapserver/pull/4978">https://github.com/mapserver/mapserver/pull/4978</a><br clear="all">
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">The issue is that the <gml:pointMembers>, <gml:curveMembers> and the <gml:surfaceMembers> tags where removed in the version 1.0 of the "Simple features profile":<br>
<a href="http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=15201&passcode=h597f3yybeu8fqxh99kh">http://portal.opengeospatial.org/files/?artifact_id=15201&passcode=h597f3yybeu8fqxh99kh</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom:12.0pt">I think that the "Simple features profile" should be preferred in all cases where it's possible to be as iner-operable as possible, for example OpenLayers take the chose to implement only the "Simple features
profile":<br>
<a href="http://trac.osgeo.org/openlayers/ticket/2388">http://trac.osgeo.org/openlayers/ticket/2388</a><br>
<a href="https://github.com/openlayers/openlayers/pull/1323">https://github.com/openlayers/openlayers/pull/1323</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I hope that will be included in the version 7.0 :-)<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Sincerely<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Stéphane Brunner<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">-- <br>
<a href="http://camptocamp.com/" target="_blank">camptocamp.com</a><br>
<a href="http://mapfish.org" target="_blank">mapfish.org</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>