[mapserver-users] Status on ticket 2582?

[Steve Lime]

Hi guys: I think we need a small RFC on this issue. The impacts are too
broad to handle
without a formal plan. Anyone care to take the lead?

Steve

>>> On 2/22/2009 at 4:51 PM, in message
<1235343099022-2369505.post at n2.nabble.com>,
paalkr <pal.kristensen at statkart.no> wrote:

> Hi!
> 
> Good idea, this could even make the dump == false / true for OWS
redundant.
> Adding wfs_disable_request 'all' would effectively prevent wfs
support. 
> Adding wms_disable_request 'GetFeatureinfo' would be the same as dump
==
> false on a WMS layer.
> 
> I think the following situations are the most common where this
"hiding"
> functionality would be needed:
> 
> 1) Adding a "copyright" statement to a map. Hiding the layer and
setting
> status to default will insure that the label is rendered regardless
of
> requested layers.
> 2) Exposing different raster resolution layers as one "logical"
layer. This
> can be achieved in two different ways
> a) adding all the raster layers (status == default) to a group as
hidden
> layers (the group will (should) then become hidden as well), then add
a
> "dummy" layer (which don't draws anything) with the same name as the
group.
> Requesting the dummy layer would actually also request the group
because the
> name is identical.
> b) adding all the layers as hidden single layers (status == default)
and use
> the requires mechanism to set dependencies to a "dummy" layer.
> 3) Hiding tileindex layers. Setting up the tileindex as a separate
layer is
> the only way of adding a tileindex to e.g PostgreSQL atm.
> 4) Enable / expose some layers only for certain service types (wms,
wfs,
> sos, wcs)
> 5) Limit the "users" ability to interact and change the map
appearance.
> 
> Anyway. I hope that either Martins patch is added to 5.4 or that we
agree on
> something similar, in time to reach the 5.4 release.
> 
> Regards,
> Pål Kristensen
> 
> 
> Martin Kofahl wrote:
>> 
>> Hi,
>> it becomes apparent that we try to solve different issues with
hiding, 
>> ignoring and so on. We should try to find an implementation which
also 
>> solves related tickets but is open for future requirements.
>> 
>> So couldn't we use a metadata like [service]_disable_request which
lists 
>> all request type (per service) MapServer shouldn't support for a
layer? 
>> Maybe expanded with the request type 'all'. Possible examples:
>> 
>>      wms_disable_request 'all'
>>      wms_disable_request 'getcapabilities getfeatureinfo'
>> 
>> This should solve tickets 337, 1952, 2582.
>> What do you think?
>> 
>> Martin
>> 
>> 
> 
> -- 
> View this message in context: 
> http://n2.nabble.com/Status-on-ticket-2582--tp2337548p2369505.html 
> Sent from the Mapserver - User mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> mapserver-users mailing list
> mapserver-users at lists.osgeo.org 
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users