[mapserver-users] Status on ticket 2582?

[Alan Boudreault]

I'll make the RFC in the next days.

Alan

On February 23, 2009 01:09:36 pm Steve Lime wrote:
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapserver-users mailing list
> mapserver-users at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapserver-users