[Qgis-user] QGIS web client(s) status(es)
Daniel Vicente Lühr Sierra
dluhr at ieee.org
Thu Jun 2 07:44:04 PDT 2016
Hi Andreas,
thanks to you and to Paolo and Vincent who also provided useful
information to my questions.
It is now pretty clear what's the status of the projects, and I hope
this thread will also help other people having to make a choice between
the different webclients alternatives, today.
My approach (if anyone is interested) will be to give Lizmap and GIS.Lab
a try as the feasible solutions right now for the deployment environment
I have, and will then try QWC II when it is more mature.
All the best to the development of QWC II, and of course to the other
projects, Lizmap and GIS.Lab.
Thanks again.
El 02/06/16 a las 02:49, Neumann, Andreas escribió:
>
> Hi again,
>
> Adding some additional info regarding the QWC II project. It is
> anticipated/planned to collaborate, if possible with the MapStore2
> project of the italian company "Geosolutions". They have very similar
> goals than QWC II, so some code/components could be shared or jointly
> developed.
> See http://www.geo-solutions.it/blog/mapstore-2-modern-webmapping/
>
> Greetings,
>
> Andreas
>
> On 2016-06-02 08:11, Neumann, Andreas wrote:
>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Qgis-user mailing list
>> Qgis-user at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Qgis-user at lists.osgeo.org>
>> List info: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
>> Unsubscribe: http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-user
>
>
>
>
--
Daniel Vicente Lühr Sierra
IEEE Member
IEEE Student Branch Counselor - Universidad Austral de Chile
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-user/attachments/20160602/96d1abce/attachment.html>
More information about the Qgis-user
mailing list