[Fwd: [OSGeo-Standards] WMS-C and Capabilities]
creed at opengeospatial.org
Fri Aug 29 14:00:05 EDT 2008
To be very clear, the WMTS document is not an "illegal" document for use in
the open community.
Yes, the latest version (r5) has not been publicly released by the OGC.
However, an earlier version is publicly available. Further, all Change
Requests to an existing OGC standard are now considered public
(http://www.opengeospatial.org/standards/cr). We are working the kinks out
of the pubic web app so that all outstanding CRs are available for public
review and comment. Finally, I have the authority to share in-progress
documents with other standards organizations. Once there is an official
request, all I need to do as ask the appropriate OGC Working Group (by
email) for approval to share. This is how I share early version of documents
with ISO, the IETF, and OASIS. While OSGeo is not a formal standards
organization, I feel that an open collaboration on key standards activities
is highly appropriate.
So, apologies for not having been clear on certain OGC policies before.
Going forward, if there is an OGC document that is not public and the OSGeo
community feels that that document is important enough to share for
discussion and comment prior to public release, please let me know!
----- Original Message -----
From: "Christopher Schmidt" <crschmidt at metacarta.com>
To: "Mark Leslie" <mrk.leslie at gmail.com>
Cc: <standards at lists.osgeo.org>
Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2008 11:40 PM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: [OSGeo-Standards] WMS-C and Capabilities]
> On Thu, Aug 28, 2008 at 02:03:59PM +1000, Mark Leslie wrote:
>> Jody Garnett wrote:
>> >Christopher Schmidt wrote:
>> >> On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:53:33AM -0700, Jody Garnett wrote:
>> >>> This discussion is fascinating to me as it does not align with my
>> >>> expectations ... my expectation is that this
>> >>> WMS-C documents some additional vendor specific capabilities that are
>> >>> added to an existing WMS (much like SLD support is added to an
>> >>> existing
>> >>> WMS).
>> >>> As such I am expecting to see a WMS with vendor specific capabilities
>> >>> letting me know that some TileSets are available; and that if I call
>> >>> existing GetMap operation in just the right way I can make use of it.
>> >>> So I was not expecting to see a standalone TileCache.
>> >> Right. I'm not aware of any caching tile server which also serves
>> >> non-cached data with regular WMS requests, but the WMS spec was
>> >> designed
>> >> to allow that.
>> >I was more thinking for a WMS implementation that had some caching
>> >support built in. Sounds like we have set up the convention to allow for
>> >this; but lack a proof of concept.
>> >However the point is made - Andrea is correctly describing the existing
>> >implementations. While this is not what I expected I can certainly roll
>> >with it; now if only there was a good way to tell where the source WMS
>> >server is :-P
>> >Thanks for answering my questions everyone.
>> There's another (potential) standard to consider, which is the OpenGIS
>> Web Map Tiling Service Discussion Paper. From what I can gather, this
>> is the evolution of the wmsc proposal, but they have made the decision
>> to clearly separate it from the WMS spec, GetTile instead of GetMap for
>> example. It's not a spec yet, but OWS-6 is looking to change that from
>> the sounds of it.
>> I don't have a link to the paper, but the number is OGC 07-057r4.
> The paper isn't published; no one who isn't an OGC member can get access
> to it.
> As usual, the OGC is going about creating standards in a vaccuum, hiding
> drafts from potential implementors.
> (TileCache has had WMTS support for 9 months now, but only because I got
> an illegal copy of the document from someone who does have OGC access.
> I've been waiting for the document to be published ever since so I could
> comment on it, since there are a number of supremely flawed design
> decisions, imho.)
> Christopher Schmidt
> Standards mailing list
> Standards at lists.osgeo.org
More information about the Standards