[Geomoose-users] WFS-T ideas

[Jim Klassen]

An option for TinyOWS might be to do the attribute filtering in
PostgreSQL with some combination of views/triggers/rules.  You probably
want to somehow enforce that clients can't view or update fields that
they shouldn't.

On 04/22/2016 01:34 PM, Brent Fraser wrote:
> Tanya,
>
>   Lots of wanderings.  I ran across http://featureserver.org/ while
> searching for a WFS-T server with more options for a data store
> back-end (like Spatialite).  Looks like support has died out though...
>
> Best Regards,
> Brent Fraser
> On 4/22/2016 12:06 PM, TC Haddad wrote:
>>
>> Awesome,
>>
>> "exclude_items" was just what I was interested in. Thanks!
>>
>> Interesting topics all of this. I'm very interested in your WFS-T
>> wanderings, even though I don't currently have a project to apply
>> them to.
>>
>> thanks for continuing to prompt,
>>
>> Tanya
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 22, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Brent Fraser
>> <bfraser at geoanalytic.com <mailto:bfraser at geoanalytic.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     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> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geomoose-users mailing list
> Geomoose-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-users