[OpenLayers-Dev] SOS support

[Bart van den Eijnden]

The SOS Layer is ready for review, see:

http://trac.openlayers.org/ticket/2565#comment:1

Best regards,
Bart

On Apr 7, 2010, at 1:39 AM, Tim Schaub wrote:

> 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!
> 
> Tim
> 
>> 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.
> _______________________________________________
> Dev mailing list
> Dev at openlayers.org
> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
>