[OpenLayers-Dev] SOS support

Tim Schaub tschaub at opengeo.org
Tue Apr 6 19:39:36 EDT 2010

Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
> Right agreed, however we might want to wait up until OpenLayers 3.0
> so that we can deprecate Layer.WFS and make that a convenience class
> instead.

Yeah, I'm of two minds about this.  The "wait for 3.0" strategy could 
mean nothing happens, we all get bored, and we find something else to do.

Though it is fugly, I'd be in favor of adding longer names and 
deprecating shorter existing ones.  So Layer.Vector.WFS or Layer.WFS2 or 
Layer.WFS_Next_Generation!  I also think it is time for Style2 
(deprecating Style) and Location (deprecating LonLat).

Anyway, bring on the SOS layer!


> Best regards, Bart
> On Apr 3, 2010, at 10:26 AM, Eric Lemoine wrote:
>> On Thursday, March 25, 2010, Tim Schaub <tschaub at opengeo.org>
>> wrote:
>>> Bart van den Eijnden wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> the example demonstrates the way the building blocks provided
>>>> by the library can be tied together, this is highly
>>>> application-specific, everybody will want to do it in a
>>>> different way. The example is just one way.
>>>> So what the library provides are the building blocks: 1) a
>>>> protocol for communicating with an SOS 2) formats to parse
>>>> several SOS responses and write out some requests
>>>> These can be used with the standard OpenLayers.Layer.Vector.
>>>> This is the way OpenLayers has been redesigned about 1 or 1,5
>>>> years ago, because for every type a new Layer type was
>>>> necessary in the past (Layer.GML etc). With the new design,
>>>> this is not necessary anymore. It is a much cleaner design.
>>>> So, to answer your question, there won't be an
>>>> OpenLayers.Layer.SOS. An application builder is responsible for
>>>> tying the pieces together.
>>> Hey-
>>> Quick follow up on this.
>>> Personally, I don't think we should discourage the creation of
>>> new layers that use specific formats, protocols, and strategies.
>>> The vector behavior design was supposed to encourage reuse of
>>> common code rather than discourage new specific layer types.
>>> Not sure how others feel, but if someone wanted to create a
>>> specific SOS layer, I'd be in favor of including it.
>>> Disclaimer: I have no idea if someone could create an SOS layer
>>> that would be useful in multiple applications.
>> Hi
>> Adding convenience classes makes sense to me. This "vector
>> behavior" stuff can look scary to newcomers, and convenience
>> classes could improve the situation I think.
>> For example we could have a WFS layer, pre-configured with a WFS 
>> protocol and a BBOX strategy, and with which the user just needs to
>>  set "url" and "featureNS" in the options passed to the
>> constructor. This layer could be OpenLayers.Layer.Vector.WFS,
>> although I don't like having four levels too much; but I guess this
>> kind of details should be discussed in a specific thread.
>> Cheers,
>> -- Eric Lemoine
>> Camptocamp France SAS Savoie Technolac, BP 352 73377 Le Bourget du
>> Lac, Cedex
>> Tel : 00 33 4 79 44 44 96 Mail : eric.lemoine at camptocamp.com 
>> http://www.camptocamp.com 
>> _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list 
>> Dev at openlayers.org http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev

Tim Schaub
OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org
Expert service straight from the developers.

More information about the Dev mailing list