[pygeoapi] PSC vote: RFC5: Enhanced data limit handling

[Youssef Harby]

+1
Could we also consider allowing maxitems, defaultitems, maxdistance, etc., to support an indicator (like unlimited or -1) for cases where users need the full resource or no limits/pagination applied? This would provide more flexibility without being tied to a fixed number, especially for servers with small layers/resources servers...

> From: "Angelos Tzotsos via pygeoapi"<pygeoapi at lists.osgeo.org>
> Date:  Mon, Jan 6, 2025, 2:22 PM
> Subject:  Re: [pygeoapi] PSC vote: RFC5: Enhanced data limit handling
> To: <pygeoapi at lists.osgeo.org>
> +1

> Angelos

> 
> On 1/6/25 03:44, Tom Kralidis via pygeoapi wrote:

> > Hi all: FYI per subject, putting RFC5 [1] to PSC vote.

> >

> > I will start with my +1.

> >

> > Thanks

> >

> > ..Tom

> >

> > [1] https://pygeoapi.io/development/rfc/5

> >

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > pygeoapi mailing list

> > pygeoapi at lists.osgeo.org

> > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pygeoapi

> 
> 
> -- 

> Angelos Tzotsos, PhD

> President, Board of Directors

> Open Source Geospatial Foundation

> https://www.osgeo.org/member/angelos-tzotsos/

> 
> _______________________________________________

> pygeoapi mailing list

> pygeoapi at lists.osgeo.org

> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/pygeoapi
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/pygeoapi/attachments/20250106/c5e4de51/attachment.htm>