[Geomoose-users] WFS-T ideas

TC Haddad tchaddad at gmail.com
Mon Apr 25 09:43:09 PDT 2016


Couldn't you handle login at the Apache level?

TH

On Monday, April 25, 2016, Brent Fraser <bfraser at geoanalytic.com> wrote:

> Jim,
>
>   Interesting ideas.  I had considered views (I use them extensively with
> the old GeoMOOSE editing) for other purposed like styling, but I didn't
> want to push my luck with TinyOWS.  It is implied in the TinyOWS doc that
> it will work with views (I'll test that).
>
>   The more bigger issue is security.  With the old GeoMOOSE  editing
> mechanism, I handled security in the PHP.  It checked the session to ensure
> the user was logged in and issued the SQL if they were.  I guess I'll need
> to code some PHP to act as a proxy  between TinyOWS and GeoMOOSE.
>
>   Remind me how is WFS-T better? ;)
>
> Best Regards,
> Brent Fraser
>
> On 4/25/2016 9:48 AM, Jim Klassen wrote:
>
>> 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
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Geomoose-users mailing list
>> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/geomoose-users/attachments/20160425/b806ab00/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Geomoose-users mailing list