[MAPSERVER-USERS] MapFile2XML conversion

[John Callahan]

I know what you mean about different applications of XML.  However, can 
a single file or format serve both needs?  KML is an output format and 
used in many programs but it can be viewed as a map description format 
as well: it can point to multiple datasets, access dynamic web services 
and WMS, adds style information, screen overlays, and more.  Aside from 
inclusion of coordinates/geometry of vectors data instead of referencing 
a vector dataset, KML seems to do accomplish similar tasks as map 
files.   I've always thought KML becomes difficult to share when locally 
referencing large rasters; KML as input to a map server engine would 
solve that.

It would be huge stretch to make something like this work but the lure 
of incorporating the successes of KML into an open source project (as 
something more than just an output format) just got me wondering.   Even 
converting KML files to map files (placemarks/paths/polygons become 
shapefiles) may be beneficial.  Just some thoughts...

- John

****************************************
John Callahan
Geospatial Application Developer

Delaware Geological Survey
University of Delaware
227 Academy St, Newark DE 19716-7501
Tel: (302) 831-3584  

Email: john.callahan at udel.edu
http://www.dgs.udel.edu
****************************************



Bob Basques wrote:
> John,
>  
> You're starting to think about two different applications of XML.  I 
> was interested in setting up the XML to reflect the typical MapFile 
> contents and use the XML for the Map generation out of MapServer.  KML 
> is a output format option, that would be output by MapServer, 
> (possibly using this new XML MapServer control) to format the KML output.
>  
> I would still tend to keep the configurations as file based as well, 
> the DB approach just aloows for much more flexibilty for those 
> hardcore programmers, and the MapFiles, don't input into a DB very easily.
>  
> bobb
>
>
> >>> John Callahan <diodata at udel.edu> wrote:
> Is it possible to allow MapServer to use KML, or a variation thereof?  
> I really don't what would be entailed.  For example, KML can store
> coordinates for displaying vectors, which would be pointless in our
> context.  Can KML point to shapefiles or tables for vectors like it can
> point to TIFs for rasters?  If so, it seems like the infrastructure
> (styling, external editing packages, viewers, conversion tools, wide
> adoption) is already there to build on.  Can we pull pieces from KML to
> make it easier for people to adopt without learning a new structure?
>
> +1 on keeping the configuration maps as file based.  Databases are great
> for many reasons but add an entirely new level of complexity (and points
> of failure) for any application.
>
> - John
>
> ****************************************
> John Callahan
> Geospatial Application Developer
>
> Delaware Geological Survey
> University of Delaware
> 227 Academy St, Newark DE 19716-7501
> Tel: (302) 831-3584 
>
> Email: john.callahan at udel.edu
> http://www.dgs.udel.edu <http://www.dgs.udel.edu/>
> ****************************************
>
>
>
> Barend Kobben wrote:
> > Hi Bob,
> >
> > YES, by all means do move to XML. I think this would be a very important
> > step forward (and my first guess is it would be not too complicated, 
> but you
> > never know...).
> >
> > I do see how some might be attracted to having an DB storage too, but I
> > would urge you to always have that as an alternative, not as instead-of:
> > keep the main configuration mechanism (XML-)file based! In many use 
> cases
> > there's no need for a DB and that would mean you'd have tho have a 
> DB plus
> > all its hassle, only for the configuration part. Also the current 
> file-base
> > config is ideal in situations were many people need to work on the 
> one MS,
> > such as in our educational setup, where we have many students working on
> > their own config files in their private dirs, and they don't need to 
> touch
> > the 'main' MS setup on the server.
> >
> > Actually, what are your reasons for preferring an SQL sdolution over the
> > file based one...?
> >
> >
> >  
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapserver-users mailing list
> mapserver-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users
>   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/mapserver-users/attachments/20080612/b761cc51/attachment.htm>