[geomoose-psc] Layer Events and Editing

Wed Apr 15 15:53:49 PDT 2020

On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 3:52 PM Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
>
> I think that editing is a great feature, one that previously
> distinguished GeoMoose as one of the more full-complete options.  It
> is also a niche need,  maybe 10% of "online GIS" users need editing.
> We happen to be in that 10% that needs editing (or to find an
> alternative like QGIS).  Brian, from your experience, what percent of
> users generally need editing or could improve their processes with
> editing?
>
> (B.) On Geoserver, we should let people worry about their own install
> footprint.  If they want to edit, then maybe they'll also go the
> GeoServer for WMS, etc route.  It can be a good option and if you're
> already running a java environment, the prefered one as well.  Being
> an OGC standard is another benefit here in that we can implement the
> standard and then people can put whatever they want on the other side.
> GeoServer may be a lot but it could be the right choice for many
> people.  TinyOWS may or may not work for people, not having had
> much/any attention for some time.  It does still seem to be widely
> used.  I think that deegree is an option too.
>
> (C.) "Rolling our own" has benefits both ways.  If going this way,
> going along with something already working (and separately maintained)
> has some benefits.  Jim's CouchDB suggestion has some appeal in this
> regard.  Jim, that presentation is a little out of date.  Do you know
> of more current things or if this is commonly in use this way?
> Rolling our own (or selecting one pre-rolled option) puts more
> responsibility on selecting that option.  Abstracting that choice away
> with WFS-T is nice but we do have to be bound by the realities of
> available implementations.
>
> (D.) WFS-T... is usually overkill when you just want to share a layer
> between a few GeoMoose users.  Yes, usually it is overkill.  But
> overkill prevents having to define the terms of "share a layer between
> a few GeoMoose users."  Tanya's use case might be on the periphery of
> a simple "share layers" but is well within WFS-T.
>
> I like WFS-T for being able to test with clients like QGIS but realize
> until/unless WFS-T gains more implementations or attention, we may
> have to look at other things.
>
> I think Jim's very simple use case is very useful; "here's a spatial
> feature, something needs to be done in this area."  And good point
> that much of the functionality on the client end is already there.
>
> Brent, that's interesting to hear that TinyOWS is good in use, even if
> light on documentation.  You've got a lot of experience with this type
> of editing and tested the previous versions very thoroughly.
>

P.S. I'm excited that editing might be in the works!  Either of the
routes being suggested could work too.

> Best regards, Eli
>
> On Wed, Apr 15, 2020 at 9:06 AM Brent Fraser <bfraser at geoanalytic.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Dan!
> >
> >  WFST is not a hard requirement, I just like using standards so I can mix
> > and match clients and servers to find the bet combination.  On the server
> > side we use PostGIS with django for most things; not sure how CouchDB would
> > fit in...
> >
> >  Brent
> >
> >
> >
> >  -------- Original Message --------
> > > From: "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com>
> > > Sent: April 15, 2020 9:50 AM
> > > To: "Brent Fraser" <bfraser at geoanalytic.com>
> > > Cc: "GeoMOOSE PSC" <geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [geomoose-psc] Layer Events and Editing
> > >
> > > Brent,
> > >
> > > Jim and I are backchanneling on his suggestion of CouchDB. It has an
> > easy
> > > Install on all server platforms, a good backup strategy, and ogr drivers
> > > that can move the data to/from PG and Shapefile.
> > >
> > > It would also play nice in GM3 since we can just throw GeoJson objects
> > > around. Would something along that line work for you? Or is WFST a hard
> > > requirement? Or direct editing of PG?
> > >
> > > Cheers!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 15, 2020, 10:32 Brent Fraser <bfraser at geoanalytic.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > 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
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > geomoose-psc mailing list
> > geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc