[geomoose-psc] Layer Events and Editing

[Brent Fraser]

Hi All,
  
 Over the years I've done two implementations using GeoMoose and feature 
editing.  The first based on GM 1.6 and it's custom protocol, the second 
with GM 2.4 (then a later upgrade to 2.6 and WFS-T).  Lack of feature 
editing has prevented me from doing much with GeoMoose 3.x.
  
 I'm currently reviewing Leaflet with respect to WFS-T.  Leaflet uses a 
"plugin" architecture so it is implemented by 
https://github.com/Flexberry/Leaflet-WFST.  Maybe we could leverage some of 
that code (likely not).
  
 As for the server side, I think TinyOWS is ok, but I do wish it was better 
documented.  Personally I think there should be a Python version of a WFS-T 
server with the ability to choose the type of database back-end.
  
 Best Regards,
 Brent Fraser
  
  
  
 -------- Original Message --------
> From: "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com>
> Sent: April 14, 2020 9:19 PM
> To: "GeoMOOSE PSC" <geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
> Subject: [geomoose-psc] Layer Events and Editing
>
> Hey Folks!
>
> Some of you may follow the shenanigans of the development team on GitHub
> but I know not everyone does! We've been working through a lot of great
> improvements in the last two months and as that work has evolved I've 
been
> thinking about the state of editing.
>
> 1. Unlike GeoMoose 2.X, 3.X did not include any out of the box editing
> capability. GM2.X used a subset of WFS-T in combination with either 
TinyOWS
> or GeoServer. The each had their quirks but it did, for the most part, 
work.
> 2. There's not been a priority put on editing in GM3. That's been for a 
few
> reasons:
> A. There hasn't been a lot of dedicated funding for such. The bulk of
> GeoMoose development is done under two situations: volunteer and 
sponsored.
> There hasn't been a sponsored version of the development and none of the
> develoeprs uses GeoMoose for editing.
> B. The state of current servers isn't great. GeoServer is actively
> developed but it's a lot to install and manage to simply be the WFS-T
> server. You could use GeoServer to serve all the WMS services as well 
but
> it's not an ask we've been willing to put on users. TinyOWS has not had 
a
> commit or a dedicated maintainer in a very long time. It's hard to
> recommend something that does not have a known amount of support.
> C. "Rolling our own" has always been an idea but that's fraught with
> potential maintenance disasters as well. Other services have their own
> API's for editing but targeting a single API as the basis for editing
> support in GeoMoose breaks our goal of being flexible and standards
> compliant.
> D. WFS-T, the actual standard, can be cumbersome. Like many standards
> WFS-T is pretty feature-complete. It handles all geometry-types, honours
> property data-types, all the fun of editing state, projections, and the
> rest of the nitty-gritty. But all of that is usually overkill when you 
just
> want to share a layer between a few GeoMoose users.
>
> I'm interested in hearing feedback. Who really had done what? What are 
the
> actual needs?
> _______________________________________________ geomoose-psc mailing list 
geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org 
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc