[mapserver-dev] RFC 105 : Support for WFS 2.0 (server side)

[Even Rouault]

Le dimanche 24 novembre 2013 00:42:23, Martin Kofahl a écrit :
> Hi Even,
> amazing work you've done!
> 
> After reading through the rfc I'm convinced that, regarding paging support,
> we should require an order statement for rdbms connections or at least
> mention it in the docs and all sample mapfiles (wfs_200_cite_postgis.map),
> as unexpected getfeature responses are likely to occur (think of load
> balancers).

I'm not sure we must enforce it in code (the table refered in the mapfile could 
be a view that has already a ORDER BY clause, and we wouldn't know), but 
perhaps we can strongly recommand it in the doc.

> Then i wondered about the wfs_cite_wfs2 flag. According the the
> wfs spec the service parameter is mandatory (7.6.2.3), so this might be
> more a cite issue.

Yes, the service parameter is mandatory, but the following CITE test tries to  
check server behaviour when a mandatory parameter is missing


    /**
     * A GET request that omits a mandatory query parameter must produce a
     * response with status code 400 (Bad Request) and an exception report
     * containing the exception code {@code MissingParameterValue}.
     * 
     * @see "ISO 19142:2010, cl. 7.5: Exception reporting"
     * @see "OGC 06-121r3, cl. 8: Exception reports"
     * @see "OGC 06-121r3, cl. A.4.1.5: HTTP response status code"
     */
    @Test
    public void getCapabilities_missingServiceParam() {

Unfortunately they've chosen the SERVICE parameter as a missing parameter, 
which is annoying when the server also implement other protocols. That would 
have been better if they had chosen VERSION in a DescribeFeatureType request 
for example.

> Will you remove the flag when all testing is done?

Not in that file, since it is used for testing of CITE compliance. But in 
normal mapfiles that don't try to be CITE pedantic, it is unnecessary.

> 
> Kind regards,
> Martin
> 
> 
> 
> 2013/11/21 Even Rouault <even.rouault at mines-paris.org>
> 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > As I announced a few weeks ago, WFS 2.0 implementation + Inspire Download
> > Services was in the works.
> > Please find http://www.mapserver.org/development/rfc/ms-rfc-105.html for
> > review. A candidate implementation is available in a branch mentionned in
> > the
> > RFC.
> > 
> > Best regards,
> > 
> > Even
> > 
> > --
> > Geospatial professional services
> > http://even.rouault.free.fr/services.html
> > _______________________________________________
> > mapserver-dev mailing list
> > mapserver-dev at lists.osgeo.org
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-dev

-- 
Geospatial professional services
http://even.rouault.free.fr/services.html