<div dir="ltr">I agree WFS 3.0 is a much better implementation and it would be great if a implementation is started soon to track the current standards development. However, we still have (and will have for a long time) a user need to support WFS 1.0 and 2.0 - so this still needs to be deal with. </div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 8:32 AM Carlo A. Bertelli (Charta s.r.l.) <<a href="mailto:carlo.bertelli@gmail.com">carlo.bertelli@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">What about starting with/focusing on WFS 3? The new version is really cleaner and seems much more efficient.<div>The current WFS implementation in QGIS is much better than previous versions, even if sometimes making a virtual OGR file il the only way to use some services. There are really bad server implementations out there, additionally an automated solution struggles against misleading and lazy XML informations. This is a broken idea or at least one that asks for close cooperation between server and client.</div><div>Just my remaining cent.</div><div>c</div><div><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 10:01 PM, Jeremy Palmer <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:palmerjnz@gmail.com" target="_blank">palmerjnz@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 dir="ltr">Can I also add that the refactoring that was funded in 2.16 added tests, paging support, filter query builder and dynamic caching. There is now a lot of complexity in the driver due to the complexity of WFS server implementations and the standard, plus the multi-threading code. If a refactor is proposed I would be against anything that doesn't deal current use cases and edge cases which have already been implemented. Maybe some analysis of the failed tests is the first place to start. WFS-T is a side issue to that.<div><br></div><div>Cheers,</div><div>Jeremy<div><div class="m_5937981941660427430h5"><br><div><br></div><div><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">On Tue, Sep 4, 2018 at 7:51 AM Régis Haubourg <<a href="mailto:regis.haubourg@gmail.com" target="_blank">regis.haubourg@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>Hi Even, thanks for pointing that, I missed that history. <br></div><div>I'll ask the dev's for the detailed improvements planned, I dont' have any detail currently (sorry for that)</div><div>Régis<br></div></div><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div dir="ltr">Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 21:29, Even Rouault <<a href="mailto:even.rouault@spatialys.com" target="_blank">even.rouault@spatialys.com</a>> a écrit :<br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Régis,<br>
<br>
Not that I'm against improvements, all the contrary, but just wanted to <br>
underline that the provider was seriously refactored already in 2.16. Clearly <br>
the lack of WFS-T support for 1.1 and 2.0 in the scope of those enhancements <br>
can be a source of confusion currently for users. What do you have in mind as <br>
refactoring exactly ?<br>
<br>
Even<br>
<br>
> Hi all,<br>
> I very much think that the WFS client is an really bad state, and is not<br>
> really reliable, especially in WFS-T context.<br>
> The good news is that we just have been funded to refactor it !<br>
> The work should start in september and land in 3.6. I will let our dev's<br>
> come here with more technical details about the goals. I hope we will also<br>
> be able to take benefit of this to this the OGC compliancy of the client<br>
> here.<br>
> Best regards,<br>
> Régis<br>
> <br>
> Le lun. 3 sept. 2018 à 11:36, Tom Chadwin <<a href="mailto:tom.chadwin@nnpa.org.uk" target="_blank">tom.chadwin@nnpa.org.uk</a>> a<br>
> <br>
> écrit :<br>
> > I can't offer any helpful suggestions, but just to let you know I finally<br>
> > had<br>
> > to disable all my plugin WFS tests. I used to cope, by rerunning failed<br>
> > Travis runs, but by about three months ago, it seemed no longer usable -<br>
> > failure after failure.<br>
> > <br>
> > I was using a third-party WFS, and perhaps I could have got round this by<br>
> > adding a WFS provider to the test docker image, but in this plugin's case,<br>
> > I<br>
> > didn't think it worth the significant effort to do so. The WM(T)S tests<br>
> > also<br>
> > use third-party sources and seem stable, so perhaps this wasn't the<br>
> > underlying issue anyway.<br>
> > <br>
> > If an improvement or solution could be found, it would be great to<br>
> > reinstate<br>
> > these tests.<br>
> > <br>
> > Thanks<br>
> > <br>
> > Tom<br>
> > <br>
> > <br>
> > <br>
> > -----<br>
> > Buy Pie Spy: Adventures in British pastry 2010-11 on Amazon<br>
> > --<br>
> > Sent from:<br>
> > <a href="http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/QGIS-Developer-f4099106.html" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://osgeo-org.1560.x6.nabble.com/QGIS-Developer-f4099106.html</a><br>
> > _______________________________________________<br>
> > QGIS-Developer mailing list<br>
> > <a href="mailto:QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
> > List info: <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a><br>
> > Unsubscribe: <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a><br>
<br>
<br>
-- <br>
Spatialys - Geospatial professional services<br>
<a href="http://www.spatialys.com" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.spatialys.com</a><br>
</blockquote></div>
_______________________________________________<br>
QGIS-Developer mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
List info: <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a><br>
Unsubscribe: <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a></blockquote></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
QGIS-Developer mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org" target="_blank">QGIS-Developer@lists.osgeo.org</a><br>
List info: <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a><br>
Unsubscribe: <a href="https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer</a><br></blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><div><br></div>-- <br><div class="m_5937981941660427430gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature">--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br>Carlo A. Bertelli<br> Charta servizi e sistemi per il territorio e la storia ambientale srl <br> Dipendenze del palazzo Doria, <br> vc. alla Chiesa della Maddalena 9/2 16124 Genova (Italy)<br> tel./fax +39(0)10 2475439 +39 0108566195 mobile:+39 393 1590711<br> e-mail: <a href="mailto:bertelli@chartasrl.eu" target="_blank">bertelli@chartasrl.eu</a> <a href="http://www.chartasrl.eu" target="_blank">http://www.chartasrl.eu</a><br>--------------------------------------------------------------------------<br><br><br><br></div>
</div>
</blockquote></div>