[mapguide-internals] GETTILEIMAGE version 2.0.0 and RFC 11

Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S ks at geograf.dk
Fri Mar 13 11:20:21 EDT 2009

Should I update the RFC to reflect the current state of things?

Regards, Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S

Walt Welton-Lair skrev:
> It was originally implemented as version "2.0.0", but then was later changed to "1.2.0".  See https://trac.osgeo.org/mapguide/changeset/1216.  The RFC was never updated.  So "1.2.0" corresponds to the updated version.
> Walt
> -----Original Message-----
> From: mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org [mailto:mapguide-internals-bounces at lists.osgeo.org] On Behalf Of Kenneth Skovhede, GEOGRAF A/S
> Sent: Friday, March 13, 2009 5:55 AM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: [mapguide-internals] GETTILEIMAGE version 2.0.0 and RFC 11
> I'm investigating issue #860, which points to RFC 11.
> In RFC 11 it states that the GETTILEIMAGE should have version "2.0.0" to 
> take advantage of the non-MgMap based functionality.
> However, when I issue a request with version set to "2.0.0", I get an 
> "Invalid Operation Version" exception.
> When I look at the mapagent http test forms, it uses "1.2.0" as the 
> version number, and it use the MapDefinition based approach.
> The RFC states that this is included in 1.2.
> Is it just an issue with the RFC text itself, which should state "1.2.0" ?

More information about the mapguide-internals mailing list