[MapProxy-dev] Contributing to MapProxy

Fri Nov 24 05:42:56 PST 2023

Hi Tom,

Ah thats another option you mention, did not even think about that.

Right, one could add, for example, an mbtiles provider for API Tiles, 
that reads the cache generated by mapproxy directly, without talking to 
mapproxy.

But my thoughts now are to use the existing endpoints of mapproxy for 
that, so that features like "lazy-caching" will still work. We e.g. have 
TMS and WMTS endpoints in mapproxy which serve the data tiled (x/y/z like)-

I think it would be nice to have support on the side of pygeoapi for 
WMTS or TMS Services which could then be accessed via OGC API Tiles.

Not sure if i have a correct understanding here, but that way pygeoapi 
would not have to bother with different tile storage formats and instead 
talk via the "old" standards with the sources, similar as the 
"WMSFacade" already does.

What do you think?

Greetings,

Johannes

Am 24.11.23 um 13:24 schrieb Tom Kralidis:
> Johannes: thanks for this analysis, good ideas here!
>
> If I understand correctly, this means that a MapProxy cache is already 
> seeded, and a pygeoapi MapProxy tile provider would translate the OGC 
> API - Tiles requests into the given MapProxy cache.
>
> pygeoapi could then define such a provider with:
>
> providers:
> -type:tile
> name:MapProxyCache
> data:/path/to/cache.gpkgoptions:
> metadata_format:default
> zoom:
> min:0
> max:5
> schemes:
> -WorldCRS84Quad
>            type: geopackage
>            table_name: tiles_table
> format:
> name:png
> mimetype:image/png
>
> Another interesting option would be to have a pygeoapi MapProxy 
> lazy-caching option (where tiles are generated as needed).  Of course, 
> this would require more configuration on the underlying service(s) to 
> be cached by MapProxy.
>
> Thanks
>
> ..Tom
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 24, 2023 at 4:02 AM Johannes Weskamm via MapProxy-dev 
> <mapproxy-dev at lists.osgeo.org> wrote:
>
>     Hi,
>
>     So here are my first findings on the topic of OGC API and pygeoapi.
>
>     You can already publish cached WMS that come from MapProxy through
>     pygeoapi via OGC API Map
>     (https://docs.pygeoapi.io/en/stable/data-publishing/ogcapi-maps.html).
>
>     I think that is a bit inefficient, as OGC API Tiles could
>     potentially access the tiles directly as they have been stored in
>     the chosen MapProxy backend (mbtiles, files, ...).
>
>     So in order to avoid the image assembling and rescaling in
>     mapproxy (and do it in the client instead, which may not perform
>     better, maybe even worse), support for those tile backends need to
>     be implemented in pygeoapi.
>
>     Currently the only provider for OGC API Tiles in pygeoapi seems to
>     be the MVT-Provider, which obviously does not work with mapproxy.
>     So a provider / reader like mbtiles, xyz structures or similar for
>     non vector data needs to be implemented. Some things do exists in
>     pygeoapi which should help to get on the train quickly.
>
>     I think that an implementation in pygeoapi would solve your needs
>     most efficient.
>
>     Afterwards we could provide documentation and examples how to use
>     MapProxy and pygeoapi together to be OGC-API comaptible.
>
>     My 2 cents,
>
>     Greetings,
>
>     Johannes
>
>
>     Am 22.11.23 um 16:18 schrieb Johannes Weskamm:
>>
>>     Hi,
>>
>>     This sounds very good in my opinion! Having OGC API Support in
>>     MapProxy would be a really nice feature and enable MapProxy to
>>     catch up with the future of OGC Standards.
>>
>>     In general, Pull Request are always welcome and the features you
>>     mentioned sound interesting, so i see no obvious reasons that
>>     would block your contributions.
>>
>>     Some bigger goals, like OGC API Support, would need some
>>     discussion before starting with development. Before reinventing
>>     the wheel one should examine what pygeoapi has to offer.
>>
>>     The current documentation
>>     (https://docs.pygeoapi.io/en/stable/data-publishing/ogcapi-tiles.html)
>>     even mentions MapProxy as a possible data source, but the
>>     examples are lacking, so i am not sure if support already exists
>>     or needs to be done. But even if its still missing, i guess it
>>     would be the more elegant way to use pygeoapi together with
>>     mapproxy or implement and extend the relevant classes, as the
>>     main thing is already done in pygeoapi and updated regularly.
>>
>>
>>     I may find some time in the upcoming weeks to shed some more
>>     light on that.
>>
>>     I am also interested what other people think about that.
>>
>>
>>     Greetings,
>>
>>     Johannes
>>
>>
>>
>>     Am 13.11.23 um 09:52 schrieb Alistair Everett via MapProxy-dev:
>>>
>>>     Hi all,
>>>
>>>     At the Norwegian Meteorological Institute we're considering
>>>     using MapProxy to provide model and other map based data to some
>>>     of our frontend services. I'm aware we've been somewhat involved
>>>     with MapProxy before and used it for some of our services,
>>>     unfortunately most of those involved aren't working here anymore
>>>     so we're looking at building from scratch and modernising our
>>>     services. First with a new WMS offering, but we would also like
>>>     to be able to provide OGC API endpoints in the future.
>>>
>>>     There are a couple of features which we would be interested in
>>>     having in MapProxy, particularly related to dimensions - for
>>>     example, other forms of caching (S3 and mbtiles), seeding, and
>>>     potentially reading available dimensions from WMS sources. I
>>>     know some of these features are available as standard but I
>>>     believe they currently don't necessarily work with dimensions.
>>>     As part of this project I'm hoping that we will have some
>>>     developer time to put into this, so I'm interested in hearing
>>>     what the community thinks of this, how it might fit in with any
>>>     roadmap the MapProxy community might already have, and if you
>>>     are open to us submitting our own MRs for these features?
>>>
>>>     I'm also interested in what the community thinks of OGC-API
>>>     endpoints, do you see this as something which MapProxy would
>>>     like to offer, if the resources were available to develop it? Or
>>>     do you see this as something which would rather be offered
>>>     through other packages, for example pygeoapi with MapProxy
>>>     providing a tile cache in the background?
>>>
>>>     Interested to hear your thoughts,
>>>
>>>     Kind regards,
>>>     Alistair
>>>
>>>     --------------
>>>     *Dr Alistair Everett*
>>>     Senioringeniør / Senior Software Engineer
>>>     Avdeling for Geoutvikling
>>>
>>>     *Phone:* +47 939 68 985
>>>     *Email:* alistair.everett at met.no <mailto:alistaire at met.no>
>>>
>>>     *Meteorologisk Institutt*,
>>>     Henrik Mohns plass 1,
>>>     0313 Oslo
>>>
>>>
>>>     _______________________________________________
>>>     MapProxy-dev mailing list
>>>     MapProxy-dev at lists.osgeo.org
>>>     https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapproxy-dev
>
>     -- 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapproxy-dev/attachments/20231124/ebe9ba86/attachment.htm>