<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Hi Martin,<br>
<br>
I think we need both :<br>
* QgsExpression for simple Process on Geometry and simple
parameters<br>
* SEXTANTE for complexe Process on Raster, Vector Layer, multiple
Layer, etc<br>
<br>
After some tests on WFS-Transaction, I need a way to validate my
geometry before updating or adding feature. In this case SEXTANTE
will be too big, QgsExpression is exactly what I need no more no
less. I do not need to Process layer.<br>
<br>
For SEXTANTE, Vincent Picavet give the good solution :<br>
<i>* Making sextante totally independant of qgis GUI, to be able
to run sextante processes in batch in command line mode</i><i><br>
</i><i>This will open the door to use Sextante as a real WPS
processes generator, </i><i><br>
</i><i>with features not unlike an ETL (or ELT).</i><br>
<br>
René-Luc D'Hont<br>
3Liz<br>
<br>
Le 03/12/2012 17:43, Martin Dobias a écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAC2XbFd8tvyO-YxyFNnHQga-p0fXTBazBsCxO-W0dhUSLvPqyA@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite"><br>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 2:31 PM, rldhont
<span dir="ltr"><<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:rldhont@gmail.com" target="_blank">rldhont@gmail.com</a>></span>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<div>My idea was to have a simple WPS server based on
QGIS-Server, very simple for simple vector case, and I
thought it's a good idea. I only need to validate
geometry, constructing simple buffer or intersection.<br>
</div>
<br>
For big processing, I think SEXTANTE is better suitable,
but for a WPS serveur, SEXTANTE didn't need QGIS. We can
construct a WPS Server based on pySextante with pyWPS.<br>
<br>
I don't really want to hack QgsExpression, just accesses
to very simple processing, I'll just it. For SEXTANTE, It
will be better to work on someting based on pyWPS.<br>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>I don't think PyWPS would be a good choice for WPS server
implementation. From a broader view, PyWPS does the same
thing as SEXTANTE does: it allows users to run processes and
it allows developers to provide custom processes. The main
difference is that PyWPS processing is meant to be triggered
by WPS requests, while SEXTANTE processing may be triggered
by anything (currently mainly GUI). On the backend side,
PyWPS supports GRASS, while SEXTANTE offers much more by
default. It's true that one could attach SEXTANTE to PyWPS
and let QGIS server call PyWPS all the time, but that would
bring just additional limitations.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>In fact, the server-side WPS support could be implemented
directly within SEXTANTE, the only thing that would QGIS
server do would be to pass WPS request to SEXTANTE routine
and send its response back to server.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So the bottom line from my point of view:</div>
<div>SEXTANTE +1</div>
<div>QgsExpression -1</div>
<div>PyWPS -1</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Regards</div>
<div>Martin</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>