[Geomoose-users] WFS-T ideas

[Brent Fraser]

Tanya,

   There are a couple of things happening here with respect to 
attributes.  As a GeoMOOSE implementer, I can limit the attributes in 
the Attribute Dialog by specifying only the ones I want to present to 
the user in the <mapsource> definition in the mapbook:

         <attribute name="geoid10"    type="user" label="ID:" 
default-value="27999"/>
         <attribute name="namelsad10" type="user" label="Name:"/>
         <attribute name="classfp10"  type="select" label=" Type: 
"       default-value="C5">
             <option value="C1">C1</option>
             <option value="C5">C5</option>
         </attribute>

even though there could be an additional 10 attribute fields in the 
database for that feature type, the user will never see them.  All good.

The other thing is a little odd.  In my Iceberg application I have a 
"created_time" that gets automatically populated by the Postgres 
database engine:

created_time timestamp with time zone DEFAULT now(),

In my testing, TinyOWS was generating an error regarding time formats, 
which was unexpected since I never listed the
created_time attribute in the mapsource.  It appears TinyOWS gets all 
the attributes by default.  I was able to prevent this by adding a line 
in the TinyOWS config.xml:

exclude_items="created_time,approved_time,deleted_time,obs_time"


Best Regards,
Brent Fraser

On 4/22/2016 11:38 AM, TC Haddad wrote:
> Hi Brent
>
> Just briefly skimming the TinyOWS config options:
>
> - XML: http://mapserver.org/tinyows/configfile.html#tinyows-configfile
> - Mapfile: http://mapserver.org/tinyows/mapfileconfig.html
>
> I don't see a place where you can confine editing to only a specific 
> few attributes. It seems like you make the layer editable or not 
> (where editing includes geometry and all attributes).
>
> I don't know the WFS-T spec well enough to know if it is an option in 
> the spec that is just not implemented in TinyOWS, or what. Interesting 
> question, will try to look it up.
>
> But anyhow, circling back to GeoMoose, if we wanted to find a way for 
> a user to "hide" fields from editing, it might have to be entirely on 
> the GM side if not supported by TinyOWS.
>
> Tanya
>
> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Brent Fraser 
> <bfraser at geoanalytic.com <mailto:bfraser at geoanalytic.com>> wrote:
>
>     Interesting stuff.  What did the layout of your attributes form
>     end up looking like?  What would we need to address in GeoMOOSE to
>     make it usable in a project like yours?
>
>     Thanks!
>
>     Best Regards,
>     Brent Fraser
>
>     On 4/21/2016 11:43 PM, Raffaele Morelli wrote:
>
>         On 21/04/16 at 05:21pm, Brent Fraser wrote:
>
>             Hey all,
>
>                I've been experimenting with Geomoose's WFS-T (feature
>             editing). Any
>             thoughts about allowing teh target of the attribute
>             editing to be a tab
>             instead of just a dialog?
>
>         Recently I've been involved in a survey project, basically I
>         was asked
>         to allow ~4500 users to insert points on a map and fill a form
>         (attributes).
>
>         Attributes form was "huge", ie ~15 select lists (with multiple
>         choice) and ~5 textbox, I
>         would have liked to use GeoMOOSE but WFT-T issues (those
>         recently pointed out to this ML)
>         and your point made me give up and switch to Drupal+Openlayers.
>
>         Must say I did not spent too much in digging into GM code for
>         that attribute thing
>         as my deadline was really close.
>
>         Ciao
>         /r
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     Geomoose-users mailing list
>     Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org <mailto:Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org>
>     http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-users
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-users/attachments/20160422/c01c771f/attachment-0001.html>