[Geomoose-users] WFS-T ideas

Brent Fraser bfraser at geoanalytic.com
Mon Apr 25 10:07:58 PDT 2016


Maybe, I'll have to study how  Apache handles authentication...

Best Regards,
Brent Fraser

On 4/25/2016 10:43 AM, TC Haddad wrote:
>
> Couldn't you handle login at the Apache level?
>
> TH
>
> On Monday, April 25, 2016, Brent Fraser <bfraser at geoanalytic.com 
> <mailto: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/ca6810bd/attachment.html>


More information about the Geomoose-users mailing list