[Qgis-user] QGIS web client(s) status(es)

[Neumann, Andreas]

Hi Daniel, 

What you discovered/write below, is quite accurate. 

As one of the authors and users of QGIS Web Client I I add some
comments. 

QGIS Web Client 1 is technologically "end of life" (old ExtJS version 3,
OpenLayers 2) - also the code is not so nicely structured. It will still
receive some smaller updates, though. For this reason we decided to
rewrite QGIS Web Client II from scratch, based on modern libraries
(OpenLayers 3, ReactJS) and a better, more modular update. You can find
a spec document
(https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QHF7c3Z1yv-Y86fiAAb2I02fP6BysQXO5nd4y-qaR8A/edit?usp=sharing)
and a design study for the GUI interface
(https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0h3PAH5uoY6UG82Y19BdW9IR0U/view?usp=sharing).
QWC II will be fully responsive (one version for both desktop and
mobile) and it is planned for a later edition to get a nice
configuration and deployment plugin (inspired by the Boundless Web App
Builder). You can expect initial useful QWC II versions in Q4 2016, but
a lot of the additional development will happen in 2017. 

QGIS Web Client II will be financed by Swiss, Swedish and German gov
authorities. Development starts in early July and  LizMap is primarily
developed and used in France and other more southern countries (like
Italy, Spain I think). But both projects can be used, contributed and
enhanced by anyone. Both versions need a bit of OS/Server know-how to
install, mainly for the server part and middleware/micro services. 

One bigger difference is, that Lizmap requires a middleware, while QGIS
web client does not (but should be enhanced by some microservices
(serverside scripts), such as for searching). Currently, LizMap has more
features than QGIS Web Client I (specifically for editing/attribute
table display), but I think that QGIS web client II will catch up on
that. So there is some "friendly competition" between the two projects
and both contribute to QGIS server enhancements. 

So, if you need a lot of the LizMap features that QWC I doesn't have
now, I would go with that - but if you need a basic viewer (query, print
out, DXF export, etc.), with nice search, you could give QWC I a try and
then change to QWC II in 2017. I believe that QWC II will have a very
nice GUI (see
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0h3PAH5uoY6UG82Y19BdW9IR0U/view?usp=sharing)
and will be fully responsive. During 2017 we will also focus on easy
configuration/deployment. If you believe in QWC II, then of course you
will be invited to join on whatever level you choose (specifiyng new
features, financing, developing, documenting, etc.) - once the initial
QWC II version will be in the QGIS github repository. The initial
version will be developed by Sourcepole in Switzerland, but later other
devs/companies are invited to join. 

Please let me know if you have additional questions. 

Greetings,
Andreas 

On 2016-06-02 00:38, Daniel Vicente Lühr Sierra wrote:

> Hi all,
> 
> (Please, I'm sorry if multiple copies of this message arrive to the list, I sent it first with out being subscribed and apparently it didn't get through)
> 
> I am working on a couple projects which involve the implementation of
> small scale spatial data infrastructures (Spatial DB + GIS server + GIS
> webclient). I have good knowledge in C/C++ and Python development but my
> JavaScripts skills are "weak" to say the least.
> 
> I have QGIS server working + a PostGIS enabled PostgreSQL DB, and the
> users (which are familiar with QGIS desktop) will develop map projects
> with QGIS desktop.
> 
> Now, for the choice of a web-client I have found two alternatives which
> apparently work with QGIS server "in mind" (make use of its extensions,
> like print composer, etc.):
> * QGIS web client.
> * Lizmap web client.
> 
> First, I would like to know if any or both projects are "officially"
> active (I understand by the timestamps in github that both are, but
> Lizmap looks more "lively"). Also, I read somewhere in the list about a
> QGIS webclient "Mk. II" being worked on.
> 
> Second, I would like to know if QGIS-webclient has support for WFS
> layers, or if it is easy to implement (OpenLayers should be able to
> handle WFS, but I don't know if that functionality has been implemented in the webclient).
> 
> Finaly, just by reading the documentation (I haven't tested Lizmap,
> yet), it looks like Lizmap has more features (and more modern) than QGIS
> web client, like a workaround to include the base layer in a printed
> copy of the map, WFS-"ready", links to media files, portable
> devices-friendly, embedded user access control, animation support for
> temporal vector layers, and others, at the expense of a slighltly more
> complex way of generating the up of and FTP server) project output (requires the use of a
> plugin and optionally the set).
> I would like to read opinions of anyone who has tried both clients and
> had a chance to compare them.
> 
> Any insight in these matters is highly appreciated.
> 
> Thanks

  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/attachments/20160602/48ac256e/attachment.html>